Skip to main content

tv   MSNBC Live With Hallie Jackson  MSNBC  February 1, 2018 7:00am-8:00am PST

7:00 am
>> see you in an hour, girl. thank you. serious struggle over secrets happening now between the president and some of his people. we'll see if we will get to see anything from that controversial memo. top democrat saying republicans changed up that memo before sending it to the white house. fbi director taking an extraordinary step to try to stop the president from releasing this thing. and you've got the white house, potentially, potentially ready to green light this release. but will the new back and forth change up that timeline? this is not normal. this is not the way things usually go. this is unprecedented. this is not the only russia related headline we're reporting out today. why the president's white hand woman, hope hicks, finds herself under a new microscope this morning with that infamous meeting back in the headlines. president trump as all of this goes down, leaving for about 30 minutes for that gop retreat in
7:01 am
west virginia. reporter also get a chance to shout some questions as he gets on the chopper and maybe get some answers. you'll want to watch to see if that happens about 35 minutes from now. one of the reporters who will be there is my colleague, kristen welker on the north lawn right now. before you and i talk, i want to set up here the who, what, when, where, why of this memo thing. we know it was written by devin nunes and his staffers. it reportedly charges the fbi and justice department of abusing their spy powers, in particular against an associate. somebody close to president trump. they were able to do that, republicans say, because the fbi and doj basically duped a u.s. spy into giving them the info. the whole thing is meant to under cut the entire russia investigation. given all that, our reporting was that the white house maybe was going to give the green light to this memo possibly today before this back and forth with democrats and republicans, including adam schiff.
7:02 am
bottom line seems like not clear when this is happening, if it's happening and how it's happening. >> you're absolutely right. there is no guarantee, i'm told, by a senior administration official, that the memo will be released after multiple sources told you, told me overnight that it was looking pretty likely for today. the reason is not clear. but one administration official says the white house and congress want to make sure they're following the correct protocol. following specific rules in the house for the release of a document like this. so they're trying to drill down on what that rule looks like and how to follow t by the way, it's rule that's never been used before. there may be some confusion surrounding all of that, hallie. you hit on another critical point here. there was a late-night, overnight, back and forth between adam schiff and devin nunes. adam schiff, ranking member, accusing republicans of changing the language in the memo,
7:03 am
changing it from what was approved out of committee. schiff says the majority made material changes which committee members were never appraised of, never had the opportunity to review and never approved. nunes firing back, hallie, the minority is now complaining about minor edits, as bizarre distraction from the abuses detailed in the memo. then a democratic aide firing back at that, saying changes not cosmetic and almost all of them are unrelated to concerns about sensitive information. if you put all of this together, hallie, bottom line, it's not clear when this memo is coming out as they work through all of this confusion. what we also know is that publicly the president and his chief of staff have been pretty clear that the president's mind is made up, that he wants to release it, as he was leaving the state of the union. of course, we all remember him saying on tuesday, 100% he's going to release it, when asked by a lawmaker there. >> pretty clear the president's intentions, at least for him. kristen welker, thank you.
7:04 am
we'll see you in the white house in a little bit and we may see you in half an hour when the president leaves for west virginia. >> indeed. >> clint watts and here on set our panel for the next 57 minutes, political reporter for real clear politics, kaitlyn huey burns. clint, let's start with you. where the gop is having their retreat at greenbrier. if this thing is going to be released the senate intelligence committee should have also had a chance to see it. the democratic counter memo should be released as well. this memo fight is laying their divisions not just inside the republican party, it seems, but also, of course, between the president and the guy he picked to lead the fbi. >> it is one of the craziest scenarios ever. brand new fbi director that's been there a few months who is going to the president saying don't do this. you have rod rosenstein, who was essentially set up as the fall guy in the comey firing, now trying to defend these
7:05 am
intelligence collection tools, the fisa tools. it doesn't make any sense. you have divisions inside congress and it's all up to the white house. they want to push this ajaengag. at the same point they want to keep the conspiracy going in the news. we'll end up having a weakened federal law enforcement agency that can't use these tools when they need it. can you imagine being an fbi agent using a fisa warrant or wiretap in a corruption case knowing years from now a politician on the hill may pick out pieces of your documentation. >> very public one going on between the fbi and the president. a graphic to show you. the president, i'm told john kelly has been very involved in the discussion around this th g thing.
7:06 am
devin nunes, paul ryan said he thinks this should be released. rod rosenstein, adam schiff and christopher wray do not. i want to get your reaction after this. >> my understanding from sources inside the fbi is that director wray is prepared to rebut -- if the white house decides to release the nunes memo, director wray is prepared to issue a rebuttal. the question is, what will that contain? does that tee up a real confrontation between the white house and the fbi? >> clint, it seems like it would tee up a real confrontation. >> yes. >> what would a rebuttal look like? >> they would go through point by point from the memo and as much as possible try to protect the sources and methods they used to gain their probable cause to go for that application to begin with. and they would start to go into each of them and say this point that you brought up which you say is part of an alleged conspiracy doesn't actually make sense. what you don't know are the following things.
7:07 am
the other part we should look at with this is a fisa application goes in and there are renewals, one after another, usually on 90-day increments. evidence gets put toward each of those renewals. is this memo about a specific renewal? it seems it is. is it about one that rod rosenstein signed after taking over from sally yates? i'm sure that dossier is going to be connected into it. the australians, belgians, other european partners, i bet those won't be in that memo that nunes releases. >> i want to bring in jill and kaitlyn on this, too. rod rosenstein involved in this, another extraordinary step. this guy, deputy attorney general of the united states, this memo is going to be released. he doesn't want it to be and the white house does. >> and rod rosenstein is the person who appointed the mueller probe. the question i have is why the president wants this released. the white house has said they
7:08 am
want transparency but we also know over and over and over again the president and his allies have tried to discredit the probe entirely. what would this kind of information put out to the public prompt the president to do or say as it regards to this probe? you also made a really important point at the beginning of this, which is nop of this is normal. we've seen the house intelligence committee traditionally a bipartisan committee, over the past year kind of spiral into this partisan chaos. and it's really remarkable to see that ranking member and the -- nunes, who recused himself from the russia probe, be sparring in this way. >> i want to come back to that point. we hear about the deep state. quote, unquote, deep state. this is the president and a guy he picked to lead the fbi. this is trump, donald trump, versus one of his own people here. it's interesting, given that we know he values loyalty, we know that's important to him. and that's the back drop to how we're seeing all of this. >> handpicked fbi director who
7:09 am
just started in there. he's bringing in his own people, establishing himself there. one of his first acts in office is to go up against the president. go back to what you were say in, why the president wants this released. what he has been telling people, he wants this released because he believes if they're able to -- the justice department if, they're able to paint the fbi as being against him, that means they're chipping away at any sense of credibility around the russia investigation. >> and, again, i don't think we can underscore this point enough. clint, i want to give you the last word on this. as our team has put together, this is not normal, because it's not. fbi and justice department are discussing a pending criminal investigation with congress. this rule has never been used before. you have the top republican on intel not sharing it with the senate people, his own party, the fbi and doj publicly objecting to the release and the government exposing material
7:10 am
that would shed light on methods. >> we haven't even talked about representative gowdy leaving out of -- so many crazy things happening. ultimately what is the worst part of this for america, there's no way americans and their security or law enforcement and judicial systems are improved by this. they're only degraded. and we look to the president. we look to congress for leadership in this country about bringing people together, protecting democratic institutions. in fact, what we see is them doing the very opposite of that for their own personal and political gain. i don't know how this will ultimately end up for the fbi agents, military and even law enforcement who are out there, doing their jobs every day. could you imagine moving forward in an investigation right now, in trump country and trying to develop a source, a lead, work on some sort of subpoena? you would have so little support, it really undercuts the
7:11 am
safety of americans. >> interesting point. clint watts, thank you very much for coming on and talking through that. i will ask kaitlyn and jill to stay on. we may hear the president fwauk this. he is getting ready to leave the white house this hour, heading over to west virginia, where gop members are headed. battle lines are already being drawn for november. is sparking innovation. you see it in the southern tier with companies that are developing powerful batteries that make everything from cell phones to rail cars more efficient. which helps improve every aspect of advanced rail technology. all with support from a highly-educated workforce and vocational job training. across new york state, we're building the new new york. to grow your business with us in new york state, visit
7:12 am
7:13 am
on thousands of hotels, cars and things to do. like the royalton riviera cancun for 54% off. everything you need to go. expedia.
7:14 am
7:15 am
we are keeping an eye on the white house. taking shots at democrats on twitter this morning. will be planning infrastructure discussing immigration and daca, not easy when we have no support from the democrats. how about this pep talk from vice president pence? >> mid terms will be a challenge, right? i think you all know what president trump thinks about conventional wiszs wisdom. >> he's not super into it, i don't think, kasie hunt. nbc capitol hill correspondent, out in west virginia at that retreat. as part of the 2018 strategy, vp going after native son joe manchin, one of the friendliest democrats to the white how. what's up with that? >> well, hallie, he's also one
7:16 am
of the most vulnerable democrats on the map this year f republicans want to hang on to that very narrow senate majority they need to make sure they don't lose the two states at risk for them, nevada and arizona. and they would like to take out a vulnerable democrat, and joe manchin is arguably one of the most vulnerable. the difference is that he is well loved here in west virginia. his political skill, quite frank ly, have kept him as one of the very last democrats standing in the state that went more overwhelmingly for president trump than any other in 2016. i want to show you what mike pence had to say about him last night and then give you a taste of how joe manchin responded. take a look at what the vice president had to say. >> people in the mountain state you deserve to know when it came to cutting your taxes, joe voted no. joe voted no to give working families more of your
7:17 am
hard-earned money. joe voted no on tax cuts for job creator creators. >> reporter: joe manchin argues that he doesn't think any of those votes he took would have supported -- he doesn't think any of those votesy bad for the people of west virginia. he framed it instead as a potentially voting to take way health care for hundreds of thousands of people in west virginia. but he also had this memorable line. the vice president's comments are exactly why washington sucks. i'm disappointed in his comments but will continue to make washington work so west virginia and our country work. adopting a little bit of the trump approach to, you know, this kind of back and forth, using language that we've probably all heard him use privately. but he's now taking that out into the public sphere here. and, of course, running against washington never a losing way to approach things typically. hallie? >> what are you watching for today? i know you have briefing there
7:18 am
is in the filing center where you are. beside the president's speech, which will happen around lunch, anything else you expect to hear? >> reporter: we're also going to have a joint news conference, kind of an annual tradition but a rare thing between the house speaker, paul ryan, and the republican leader, mitch mcconnell. we are, of course, focused on questions around immigration policy, where that's going to go. the reality is on capitol hill the legislating will shift pretty quickly into the mid term election season. that's a lot of what's going on behind the scenes here. it's a very difficult needle to thread for republicans. one hand there's many of them that can't possibly win without the president and will run with him. but if they're going to retain house majority then they're going to need people in the suburbs and, quite frankly, the president is not very popular there. it's a difficult landscape to probably understate the situation, hallie. >> all good. kasie hunt, thank you very much. i'm joined now by former chief of staff for house speaker paul ryan. real clear politics kaitlyn huey
7:19 am
burns. we'll see from your form er bos, hear from him in a little bit with mitch mcconnell. mid terms are a big part of this, immigration, daca, all the things they'll be talking about, too. do republicans really want donald trump to campaign for him, given where he is, with his approval ratings at a record low in this presidency? >> there are a lot of them who do. >> and there are some who might not? >> some who might not. no different, frankly, than the fall election in 2016. some members wanted to be seen with donald trump and some who didn't. that's not always that unusual, frankly, for presidents. presidents tend to be very popular in certain places and not as popular in others and you can use them where they can best use their popularity to help you. >> is mike pence right about conventional wisdom getting flipped? the party who wins the white house often times do not do as well in the mid terms as they would like. you have the economy and nancy pelosi, making those crumbs comments that republicans have seized on, announcing more bonuses to employees and the president has been talking about
7:20 am
it again and again. >> the development after the tax bill passed with a lot of corporations and growing number of corporations giving bonuses to their people and with tax bill changes, they're going to raise their pay. these are good things, things republicans are trying to talk about. they think it will help buoy the confidence of people. >> is that enough, guys? >> sure. the question, though, talking to republicans, is whether that breaks through in this saturated news environment over which donald trump, as president, kind of hangs over everything, right? >> to say the least. >> to say the least, exactly. so, there is an important difference, though, between the house map and senate map. i've been talking to campaign strategists all week about this map. they think that the president is going to be very key in the senate races because of all those senators up for re-elections in states that he won. and also they think that he has that kind of branding power that
7:21 am
we saw vice president mike pence just use there, saying joe voted no. things like that. just going into places and reminding people about that narrow majority. >> as positive as those announcements are from all those companies, the fact is that polling still shows the republican tax plan is deeply unpopular among voters. it just hasn't taken on in the way that the white house would like it to. >> it's not like the president has gone on the road to sell it. >> no. look, he typically does a whole round of post state of the union travel, they're supposed to be going, selling this. the president is making two speeches today in front of republican donors and in front of members of the republican party. >> one thing we think he will talk about in this speech is infrastructure there say real serious question about whether it will get any action done or nice marquis talking infrastructure. problem is, jon cornyn, gop leadership, raising questions about how you pay for this. and other republicans are concerned about this trillion dollar infrastructure plan and
7:22 am
money that will go into it. is that something that could end up dividing republicans rather than uniting them? >> i don't think it will divide republicans. but one thing that has to happen to have a realistic infrastructure plan that the president is talking about, number one, you can't just be talking about paving roads. you're going to get no private investment in that. that's fine. it's important to pave roads but that's not all. >> their plan is built around private investment? >> exactly. if you're talking about doing more creative things with the electric grid, with 5g people are talking about. are there areas they could go into and get an interest because there is a market return on these things from these people? that's the place they want to do it. and are the democrats willing to say we will do infrastructure with more than just the federal government funding everything. will they look at states and the private sector who might want to get involved in good projects? >> you know paul ryan, mitch mcconnell. what are you expecting to hear from paul ryan today in that
7:23 am
rare joint news conference? >> i don't think it will be a lot about immigration because they haven't solved it. >> the memo, about russia? >> they'll be asked about those things. they're going to talk about the tax cuts and moving forward on building the country and the economy growing and people getting more -- having more from their paychecks that they get to take home and use as they see fit. >> david hoppe, great to have you on. kaitlyn, jill, stick around. bob mueller gets ready to interview the former legal team spokesman. there are questions now about a statement prepared on air force one and why investigators are now zeroing in on a very familiar face in the white house. shawn evans: it's 6 am. 40 million americans are waking up to a gillette shave. and at our factory in boston,
7:24 am
1,200 workers are starting their day building on over a hundred years of heritage, craftsmanship and innovation. today we're bringing you america's number one shave at lower prices every day. putting money back in the pockets of millions of americans. as one of those workers, i'm proud to bring you gillette quality for less, because nobody can beat the men and women of gillette. gillette - the best a man can get.
7:25 am
7:26 am
7:27 am
we are back now with a look at your morning's headlines and new developments on what's being described as ethnic cleansing in myanmar. two journalists stories we have been covering have now been denied bail. why? the judge says the alleged violation of the, quote, official secrets act was nonbailable. lawyers for the reporters argued, hey, they were arrested for having documents that were already public. they've been in prison since
7:28 am
december 12th. on the humanitarian crisis there, the associated press are now confirming five previously unknown mass graves of rohingya muslims. they've denied these killings have taken place at all. we're following that story and something new this morning. the state department is losing its top career diplomat. tom shannon, been with the department for 35 years, is stepping down. shannon is the third ranking member of the state department. yet another career ambassador to call it quits. of the five career ambassadors at start of rex tillerson's tenure, only one is now left. and that's even as the trump administration deals with a giant list of crises around the world. not the least among them, north korea. >> brianne randall gay came to the police department in 2004 saying nassar sexually assaulted
7:29 am
her. apparently he even showed them a power point to prove his point to police. frank walsh tells nbc news, quote, we were wrong in 2004 and when you do something wrong, you admit it and you make it better. now let's talk about new reporting that's come out relating to special counsel investigation. let's set it up. remember that june 2016 meeting at trump tower between trump campaign officials and a russian lawyer? well, according to "the new york times," right as news of that meeting was about to break last summer there was allegedly a conference call about what to say in response to questions from the media. a guy who was, at the time, legal team's spokesperson, mark carallo, was on that call on the left of your screen. so is hope hicks, communications director. guy in the middle, the president, was apparently in that call, too. times reports that corallo planned to tell investigators
7:30 am
that those would never get out. hicks says she never said that and the idea that hope hicks ever suggested that e-mails or other documents would be concealed or destroyed is completely false. so, joining us now, break this down for us. the special counsel was already interested. explain the significance to this and how it adds to what we already knew. >> you have the account of an insider basically alleging that the president and one of his top advisers had a discussion about making e-mails go away, about a cover-up essentially. there's a lot of questions, a lot we don't know from this article. but here is the bottom line. we've known for a while, our reporting at nbc news has been that robert mueller is more interested in the trump tower meeting for what it says about obstruction of justice, potential obstruction, why the participants did not tell the truth about it initially, why
7:31 am
donald trump dictated that misleading statement saying it was about russia adoptions when, in fact, it wasn't. this adds another wrinkle. you have an allegation that hope hicks, communications director, suggested that these e-mails, making clear that this meeting was about the russians promising dirt on hillary clinton could be made to somehow disappear even though they were going to be turned over to congress. that wasn't going to happen. you know, we should point out that hope hicks is denying this. her counsel and others i've spoken to said this has not happened. mark corallo was there and his testimony will be carefully considered. >> we have confirmed that corallo will be speaking to the special counsel in the next two weeks, according to a source familiar with that. we were pointing that out yesterday. ken, the suggestion here, just explain the e-mails issue, and you sort of did, that hicks already knew about these e-mails saying i love it, in response to this offer of dirt. is that new? >> i think it is. this article suggests that these
7:32 am
e-mails had been prepared to be submitted to congress. people inside trump world knew about them. robert mueller's team apparently had not learned about this meeting or seen these e-mails until they were reported in the news media. so here you have the trump team discussing whether these e-mails -- who will see them, seemingly suggesting they could be made to disappear. in fact, that was never going to happen because of multiple investigations scrutinizing every aspect of this. >> let me bring in jill winebanks, ken, msnbc contributor. jill, it's not a crime to lie to the news media. it's not nice but it's not a crime. why does this reported exchange matter when it comes to this question of obstruction? >> it is part of a pattern and practice. because it's part of what seems to be an ongoing attempt to kill the investigation and to mislead the investigators as well as the public. and they were preparing this memo to announce to the public
7:33 am
what was going on, which was also intended for the prosecutor. so, if you're misleading the prosecutor, it can be part of an obstruction case. it also reveals that they knew -- all the participants knew about the memos, which means they knew that the real purpose of the meeting was to talk about dirt on hillary, not to talk about adoptions, which is code word for sanctions, which they shouldn't have been discussing either. and so you put it all together and it starts to really look bad for them and looks like it is part of this overall attempt to kill this investigation. >> you have robert trout, hope hicks' lawyer almost never going on the record, coming on the record for this, strongly denying that hicks said this. hicks has already spoken with bob mueller. potentially you're seeing mark corallo's word against hope hicks' word. how does that work itself out
7:34 am
legally? >> it's a he said, she said. that's a tough case. >> yeah. >> but they weren't the only two people in that meeting. there were a lot of other people. it's a question of how many people are going to say what mark corallo said? did mark corallo have a tape of the conversation, a contemporaneous memo? did he report it to someone else? did he call the white house counsel and tell him about this? who did he tell? what corroboration is there for him? so we don't know everything that mueller knows. we don't know whether she said it. she's denying it. right now we have to say it is -- maybe she said it, maybe she didn't. if she did, it is very, very damaging to her and to the entire case. and -- >> i'm sorry. >> go ahead. >> i want to get this point in here. the times broke this, the paper. they do this tick tock of how
7:35 am
this all went down and they write that it quickly turned into something of, quote, circular firing squad. jill and kaitlyn, is that what we're seeing right now? is that extended to today's news? >> i think that's the most interesting part of this story. obviously, interesting that hope hicks, one of trump's most loyal and longest -- >> inner, inner, inner, inner circumstan circle. >> is now involved. this is one of the first instances we really see where all of these people under legal pressure are kind of turning on each other. this is a dynamic we've seen in the white house multiple times, especially prejohn ankle. >> i sure. >> look at them now coming on the record to potentially leaking to the times to throw each other under the bus. >> all of this coming against the backdrop of the question about whether the president will meet with mueller eventually and what that interview process would look like. >> right. >> all of these data points now that are out in the public and certainly, again, we don't know what mueller knows. but all of these conversations that have already taken place. >> any minute potentially, the president walking out on the
7:36 am
south lawn to board that helicopter over to west virginia. jill winebanks, thank you. kaitlyn and jill, thank you. ken delanian, thank you for joining us as well. i think we have a shot, do we, marine one waiting for him on the south lawn. kristen welker is getting ready to yell some questions as he gets ready to go. we'll let you know what he says, or not, when it happens. and the fight against fake news and bad news for facebook. number of people using the site drops now for the first time ever after the company made big changes to go after propaganda, false news, et cetera. we'll talk about why two top democratic lawmakers say the company has still not done enough. this time next year, we're gonna be sitting on an egg. i think we're getting close! make a u-turn... u-turn? recalculating... man, we are never gonna breed. just give it a second. you will arrive in 92 days. nah, nuh-uh. nope, nope, nope. you know who i'm gonna follow? my instincts.
7:37 am
as long as gps can still get you lost, you can count on geico saving folks money. i'm breeding, man. fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent or more on car insurance. it's really hard to even think about her not being around... that's why i'm so grateful she got screened... and they caught the blockage in time. if you're over 50... call life line screening now and schedule an appointment near you. it could be the best thing for you and your family. for just $149, you'll receive five screenings- including ones that use ultrasound technology to look inside your arteries... for plaque that builds up as you age- and increases your risk for stroke and heart disease. after all, 4 out of 5 people who have a stroke, their first symptom is a stroke. these painless screenings go beyond a normal annual checkup, and this package will save you over 50%. call today and start with a free health assessment to understand your best plan of action. i still need mom. i want her with me as long as possible.
7:38 am
life line screening. the power of prevention. call now to learn more.
7:39 am
but prevagen helps your brain with an ingredient originally discovered... in jellyfish.
7:40 am
in clinical trials, prevagen has been shown to improve short-term memory. prevagen. the name to remember. just learning now during the commercial break the president has boarded marine one. didn't take any shouted questions from reporters. we'll have another opportunity to do that when he comes back to the white housearity this afternoon. meantime we want to talk about the fight against fake news. fewer people in the country are using facebook on a daily basis. why? facebook says it made some changes to the newsfeed after get i getting played by bad actors from russia. two top democrats fire off another letter to facebook and twitter, upset that the companies are dodging questions about how russia is trying to
7:41 am
spread propaganda on their platforms. using the #releasethememo. with the impact on face book, joining us now, blake, good to have you here. walk us through the facebook spin that it's dropping usership isn't actually all bad. >> they're trying to spin these numbers as a good thing, saying it's because of changes they made to the newsfeed. instead of emphasizing things like viral videos and these political ads, they'll be emphasizing more friend posts and family posts. daily users in the u.s. and canada, people who log on each day that number is down 700,000. first drop in facebook history. time spent on facebook has also fallen 5%, equating to an cumulative 15 hours a day less spent on facebook. mark zuckerberg defended those numbers to investors yesterday
7:42 am
saying it could even be good for our health. take a listen. >> when we use social media to connect with people, that correlates with long-term measures of well-being that you would expect like happiness and health. but passively watching videos or reading articles may not have those same effects. >> hallie, this back to basics approach, they want to focus on quality posts versus the amount of time they spend on the site. and as we've reported, they're in the process of ranking sites based on how trustworthy they are. facebook is making a big effort to get people back on to the site. they think the way to do it is focus on friends and family and focus less on ads, viral videos, things like that. >> blake mccoy, thank you, sir, for joining us. joined now by craig timberg. kaitlyn and jill are back with me as well. craig, to you, how significant is what facebook is doing right now? and when mark zuckerberg says this is a good thing, that
7:43 am
people aren't spending as much time on facebook, is that spin or does he have a point? >> he might have a point for the good of the world but not for facebook investors, my guess anyway. >> how significant is this, anyway, when they're saying they're trying to do these things to fight fake news? >> facebook and these other tech companies have been playing defense on the questions of fake news, on the manipulation that the russians pulled off on their platforms during the election and i think they're trying to figure out how to handle it, facing all this pressure from capitol hill and within their own industry. and i think they're still trying to work it out. i don't think the numbers going down are an inherently good thing but probably it's a good thank they're trying to react to all these pressures. >> you've got twitter also in the crosshairs of washington shall releasing this initial report on the whole release the memo hash tag. walk us through what they found. >> twitter, in response to demands from some democrats on capitol hill, said oh, no, no.
7:44 am
there's not a whole lot of russian impact on the release the memo campaign that's been on soshl media, having to do with these allegations that the fbi used its surveillance authority. quite a bit thing on social media. good, independent reporting that russian patrols have been heavily involved in amplifying this message. and so senator feinstein and representative schiff demanded facebook and twitter look into this carefully and tell the world about what was going on with the russians and they came back with letters that are pretty thin. so they've gotten new letters because these members of congress are not happy with what they've heard so far. >> totally not pleased. jill and kaitlyn, where does this go in washington? congress is clearly, it seems, not going to let up the pressure. >> and the pressure is important because, remember, the russian meddling is said to be continuing in 2018 and into 2020. that's been the big question mark about, you know, the white house undermining all of these
7:45 am
investigations. but, remember, at the root of this is the russian meddling in our election. you've heard time and time again, people in testimony on capitol hill saying this is happening now, it's going to happen again and there are a lot of questions, i think, from the public about what congress is actually doing about it. this is one example. but the pressure, i think, is going to continue. >> i'm kind of -- i kind of like the idea that the public wants to see news and want to be reading this stuff and, of course, the day that facebook announced these changes, we have the falsified attack dealing with the train. it's hard for companies to control deciding what's news and what's not in this hyper polari polarized environment. a krofcontroversial new ide doctors taking steps to fight the opioid epidemic, sending addicts to treatment against their will.
7:46 am
7:47 am
7:48 am
i'm a concrete mason. i own my own company. i had some severe fatigue, some funny rashes. finally, listening to my wife, went to a doctor. and i became diagnosed with hodgkin's lymphoma... that diagnosis was tough. i had to put my trust in somebody. when i first met steve, we recommended chemotherapy, and then we did high dose therapy and then autologous stem cell transplant. unfortunately, he went on to have progressive disease. i thought that he would be a good candidate for immune therapy. it's an intravenous medicine that can affect the patient's immune system and unleash it against the cancer. with chemotherapy, i felt rough, fatigue, nauseous. and with immune therapy we've had such a positive result. i'm back to working hard.
7:49 am
i've honestly never felt this great. i believe the future of immunotherapy at ctca is very bright. the evolution of cancer care is here. learn more at appointments available now. do you want the same tools and seamless experience across web and tablet? yes? great! then you're ready for power e*trade. the platform, price and service that gives you the edge you need. sweet! e*trade. the original place to invest online. so president trump, as you can see right there, is getting ready to head over to west virginia, white sulphur springs, i believe, for the gop retreat.
7:50 am
that's marine one heading over to andrews. afternoon. we're also watching what's happening in massachusetts. there's this new tactic up for debate in the fight against the opioid crisis. should doctors be able to force addicts into treatment against their will? nbc's stephanie gosk has more on how doctors and lawyers are answering the question. we want to warn you, some of the images you're about to see, you might find disturbing. >> reporter: users passed out in cars. needles lining alleys. these are the images of america's opioid crisis. in massachusetts, governor charlie baker has a bold and controversial new idea. a proposed law that would allow doctors on the front lines to force patients into treatment, even if they don't want to go. do you see patients in here that are about to walk out on the street and you think to yourself, that person is going to die in the next few days?
7:51 am
>> absolutely. absolutely. every single day. >> reporter: under the law, physicians like dr. becker would allowed to transport patients against their will to one of five treatment facilities in the state. once there, the treatment center could force patients to stay for up to 72 hours before needing a judge's approval. >> it is absolutely something that we consider, that i consider personally, the last resort. >> reporter: forced treatment is already allowed in massachusetts and 36 other states but requires a judge's approval. removing the judge from the process, critics say, could violate user's rights. >> people who have undergone forced treatment in massachusetts are twice as likely to die, according to the state's own data, as people who have undergone voluntary treatment. >> reporter: but dan, who runs this treatment center, believes doctors should be trusted. >> it is a serious thing if you take someone's civil liberties away from them. so i don't take it lightly at
7:52 am
all. >> if they didn't do it, i was going to die. >> reporter: patrick's parents had a judge force him into treatment 12 years ago. >> i overdosed and went to a hospital, and the second i got out, i got high. in my hospital outfit. >> reporter: he now runs a drug treatment center and supports the law. >> if someone said, i'm taking my own life, by letting someone walk out the door with addiction, it is the same thing. they're about to lose their life from drugs. why can't we do the same thing? president trump boarding air force one now. getting ready to head over to west virginia to the republican retreat, as we take a look now at the live pictures. as we do, we want to mention he didn't take any questions on his way to the chopper, as we talked about. he might on the way back. we take a look at the president now. before that, you were watching stephanie gosk reporting on the opioid crisis in massachusetts and this new technique, this new way they're
7:53 am
trying to fight the epidemic. i want to bring in dr. natalie azar. dr. natalie, thank you for being here. putting the legal questions aside for a moment, as on the other side of the screen we watch the president board air force one here, there are serious medical questions. how does this system operate right now? is it considered harmful to people? >> as stephanie pointed out in her piece, right now, 37 states have a law that allows compulsory commitment for substance abuse disorder. there's a lot of variability between the states in terms of who can petition the court to have this happen. is it a family member? does it need to be a physician? there's a lot of variability in terms of how long people are staying, what type of treatment they receive and what happens after they leave. as you can see, there's a lot of logistical, as well as constitutional, issues here. logistics can be simply, are there enough facilities and beds that can handle the capacity of all of these patients? constitutionally, of course, you
7:54 am
know, are the civil liberties issue. >> which you saw in the piece. as far as the data though, what do we know about whether involuntary admission actually saves lives? >> that's the issue. unfortunately, there is not an extensive scientific literature on how effective compulsory commitment is. i would say that this might be an example, too, that an absence of evidence doesn't mean there's evidence of absence of a benefit. it just the studies so far have led to inconsistencies in the outcomes. i don't think anybody could argue with a family member who said that if not for involuntary commitment, my loved one would no longer be alive. it's just that, you know, while some experts are saying, this is a well-intended response to the crisis, we have an obligation to have this be an evidence-based, new policy. also, you know, to that point, this is a very complex disease. >> yeah. >> addiction.
7:55 am
it is not a one-time admission and then the patient is free of their addiction. it's a lifelong commitment that requires, you know, medical management as well as follow up with trained clinicians. >> prevention wise, is that part of the conversation now? is this more about doctors, the medical community, seeing this desperate situation and trying to get a handling on it, keeping people alive, basically? >> i thinks in the short term if you're a physician on the front line and you have this idea that if the person is released to the community that they could succumb, i think the impulse is to do anything you can to save their lives. it is whether or not that's a meaningful intervention that will sort of impact the scope of the crisis in the big picture and long term. i'm not sure we have data to support that one way or the other at this point. >> dr. natalie azar joining us from new york. dr. natalie, thank you very much. >> thank you. we'll be right back with today's big picture. and if you have heart failure,
7:56 am
entrusting your heart to entresto may help. entresto is a heart failure medicine that helps improve your heart's ability to pump blood to the body. in the largest heart failure study ever, entresto was proven superior at helping people stay alive and out of the hospital compared to a leading heart failure medicine. don't take entresto if pregnant. it can cause harm or death to an unborn baby. don't take entresto with an ace inhibitor or aliskiren. if you've had angioedema while taking an ace or arb medicine, don't take entresto. the most serious side effects are angioedema, low blood pressure, kidney problems, or high blood potassium. ask your doctor about entresto. and help make more tomorrows possible. ♪
7:57 am
7:58 am
that goes beyond assuming beingredients are safe...ood to knowing they are. going beyond expectations... because our pets deserve it. beyond. natural pet food.
7:59 am
we are back with a little bit of breaking news. that is air force one heading out of joint base andrews over in maryland. the president getti inting read head to the greenbriar resort in west virginia where republicans on their retreat. the plane is taxiing down the runway now. president trump is on that thing. what we don't know is related to the other big headline of the day, which is this memo. this controversial fisa memo. whether or not the president has given or will give that green light today, tomorrow, what the timing is and where it goes. we are working for more on that.
8:00 am
we are going to be keeping you posted. we don't have time for today's big picture because i have to toss it to ali velshi and stephanie ruhle. my colleagues back in new york. a lot going on with memo watch. a lot going on with everything else happening in washington. >> i suspect we'll get a chance to talk later today, hallie. have a good morning. >> thanks, bud. good morning, everyone out there. i'm stephanie ruhle. >> i'm ali velshi. we're back together in new york. it is thursday, february 1st. let's get started. >> the president is in a showdown with the fbi, and it is all over whether or not the controversial memo should be released. >> republicans claim it shows misconduct by the bureau, but democrats and the head of the fbi are questioning its accuracy. >> national security lawyers in the white house that work for me, work for the president, they're slicing and dicing it, looking at it. it'll be released pretty quick, i think. then the whole world can see it. >> a new wrinkle from the ranking democrat on the committee, adam sch


1 Favorite

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on