tv Morning Joe MSNBC December 3, 2019 3:00am-6:00am PST
all you have to do is read the transcripts, you'll there was absolutely nothing done wrong. they had legal scholars look at the transcripts the other day and they say these are absolutely perfect. trump is right when he uses the word -- those concept, those calls that we made, two of them, were absolutely perfect calls. and i think it's a very bad thing for our country. does it cast a cloud? well, if it does, then the democrats have done a very great disservice to the country, which they have. >> wow. there you see the house speaker abiding by the water's edge r e opting not to talk politics while overseas in spain. president in london, not so much. >> mika, i mean, we just -- we can't let that go without -- the president just, once again, acted like a clown on the international stage. first of all -- >> this is just in the past hour. >> just in the past hour. and, of course, this is the same president who used the crosses of normandy to attack nancy
pelosi, to attack his domestic political rivals. this is the same president who used congressionally approved foreign aid, military aid to a democratic country invaded by vladimir putin once again to try to impact domestic politics. and, of course, you know everybody across the world is snickering when the president said, we had legal scholars looking at these transcripts -- not transcripts -- and they said it's perfect. what were the names of those legal scholars? i would love to know. and i would love to know where these legal scholars who said those calls were absolutely perfect are employed this morning. because i don't think they exist. i think it -- and one of the legal scholars came up to me and said, sir, i real think there, sir, that was a perfect call. you know, sir, i use gd to go t paris, sir, but i don't go to paris. this guy, everybody in the world knows he's lying and he's representing us on the world
stage this morning. great job. >> it's painful, but also really damaging and we'll get to why. along with joe, willie and me we have professor at princeton university, eddie glaude jr., former treasury official and economic analyst steve rattner. and president of the counsel on foreign relations authd thor of t awni author of the book "a world in disarray ". it's hard not to think about the impact the president is having on the world stage to our national security pretty much every time he opens his mouth. >> and getting in fights with everybody. after he gets in fights with other people he decides to push his tariff wars, his trade wars even more. which, of course, just taxes working class americans. before we get there, though, you know, i wanted to talk to willie. willie, you remember i think it was three years, i don't remember how long we were in
prison in turkey. >> sure. >> but remember we just desperately all we wanted was the key to the jail cell inside that cage. that's all we wanted, right? >> which god knows we tried to get it. >> every way possible. i'm not going to go into the details this morning, this is a family show. but, willie, eddie glaude, he didn't even have to bribe anybody and he got the key to his hometown. >> awe. >> and it's unbelievable in moss point, mississippi. >> moss point. >> and you know, moss point it's incredible. our families spent time there. it's a wonderful place. but how exciting his mother was able to be with him along with mayor king. how exciting, just -- isn't that something? >> that's so cool, eddie. >> so your mom is on stage with you there, they gave you the key to the city. what was that moment like? >> well, it's surreal.
i can only imagine, joe, she's watching right now to see her photo on "morning joe," she's probably smiling a bigger smile than that. i love my hometown. i'm a child of moss point, mississippi, and to receive that honor, it's the best thing that i've received up to this point in my life have some tell us what moss point is like. what kind of town is it? >> it's a small town in mississippi. it has the best seafood in the planet and it's the place where the best woman in the world lives, that's my mom. >> she must have been so proud. >> that's wonderful. >> mika, rattner, he has keys to, you know. [ laughter ] >> all right. >> i got this. >> upper east side mansions like, you know, it's very -- it's moving too. just as moving to see him use all of the keys that he has. >> moss point sounds pretty good right now. >> all right.
i think i'm going to take over here and we'll head into what's actually going on right now and general thoughts, big takeaways, the president has been speaking in london. so far richard haass, your concerns, your takeaways. >> the president has a unique stifle going into summits. before this summit began, escalating the trade war are with france. also un lateral announcing tariffs for two countries in south america for manipulating their currency when there's no evidence of that. this administration doesn't love diplomacy and military force. i think the largest story in europe is nato in disarray. president went after macron this
morning. he had an unfortunate interview with the economists calling nato brain dead. but there's real divisions with turkey and how to deal with russia. president keeps hammering the europeans for not spending enough on defense. but we're seeing this alliance that was pivotal to the united states and the west through the cold war for four decades. increasingly there's no census. and census politically is always the foundation of an alliance. and the president has a transactional approach to alliances rather than thinking about strategic purpose he constantly has a ledger and basically asks are others paying enough. >> focused on money. >> rather than saying are we getting enough out of it? which is something very different. >> apart -- >> isn't there transitional situation in europe as well because macron is stepping back? sorry, merkel is stepping back, macron's trying to assert
himself as kind of the new man of europe? >> he is. the problem is, france alone isn't strong enough do it and france doesn't have a european partner. originally it was going to be germany, merkel said no thanks. the merkel era is over, as you say. i think brexit is almost a foregone conclusion now given the election on december 12th, the illiberalism we're seeing. europe is going through the single most difficult moment since the foundations of modern europe after world war ii. >> joe. >> but, willie, it seems every move trump makes on the political stage benefits vladimir putin. we have him once again going to a nato summit. once again attacking nato allies. once again undermining an alliance that was actually put together for the purposes of holding russia and russia
expansion in check. and on top of that, he started even more trade wars when the tariff taxes that he's imposed on working class americans is really starting to be felt in this economy. we've got a manufacturing recession for the first time in a decade. and every economist says that's because of the tariff wars. he said it was -- that these trade wars were easy. it's proving to be just the opposite and yet, here we are this morning with the president expanding those trade wars even more. >> yeah. and at a time when these alliances are frayed anyway, as richard said. when europe is shaking on its own, you have the president coming in and shaking it up even more. there's some irony in president trump's criticism although it may be well founded of macron saying macron's being disrespectful to nato which has been the role of president trump through the years, including up until about yesterday. let's go to carol lee live
outside parliament where the president is spending time today. he'll have tea with prince charles and camilla. there will be a group event at buckingham palace. carol, what's the president's posture he's sits there with leaders across europe and the world? >> reporter: yeah, he does. and he's had it on his mind since really he got on the plane last night. he tweeted as soon he's got here about impeachment. we heard him today, he talked for almost an hour or more about a number of times talked about impeachment. i think the thing that was quite striking was the way that he kind of role reversed on nato a little bit where he's the one saying nato is agile and it's defending the alliance that, as you said, he's criticized since he qa he came into office and as a candidate. he did it to go after manual macron who he had sharp words for and said his comments were nasty. there's a lot of irony there. now he's going to head into other meetings, but the whole
time, you know, we'll see him meeting with world leaders. he's going to have a press conference tomorrow and all the while impeachment is going to be hanging over this. >> all right. carol lee, thank you very much. at this point it's hard not to be incredibly embarrassed watching him speak on the world stage with, you know, the french president who i feel like does his best to try and make it a palatable conversation. >> but there's a context here which is the french president won after nato, right after the president did the change of policy in syria. what this was was actually going back 40, 50 years. what you basically have say french president who is saying we can no longer trust the united states. if the president can do that in the middle east, why can't he do that in europe? he has very different views of putin and so forth. what we're seeing in some ways are the old fissures between the western alliance. macron is trying to lead a more independent europe because he
believes france can no longer count on the united states because trump has become much more unreliable, much more unpredictable. that's the backdrop to this is essentially a drifting apart. >> a repositioning. >> -- between the united states and europe where there's no trust across the atlantic and the positi the imposition of new tariffs will add fuel to the fire. >> this is nothing new. this was angela merkel a couple years ago who said sadly we can no longer count on the united states for our defense. we can no longer count on the united states for leadership. she said that, of course, after donald trump spent his first few summits in europe trashing alliances and moving closer to vladimir putin. so, yes, if macron is stepping into the role that angela merkel held for several years, he's only repeating what she said a few years ago and what every leader in europe knows how, and that is you can't count on donald trump. and boris johnson is supposed to
be his ally? his closest ally in europe? what did boris johnson tell him? hey, do me a favor, trump, stay away from me. you might hurt me because you're so ha so hated in great britain. >> president trump has stayed away from boris johnson and what's going on with him in the last couple of days. i'll let him worry about his internal politics, i'm not going weigh in on that which hasn't been his posture in the past. but, eddie, i don't know if it you're angela merkel or macron you can feel any other way than what joe just described, that you can't count on president trump, not only based on his rhetoric but based on his approach to alliances which is how much are you paying? what's the united states financially getting out of this deal? >> it's a reasonable conclusion to draw that you can no longer trust the united states under the leadership of donald trump. all the evidence suggests that that is in fact a justifiable position to reach. and then what was even more striking to me, beyond the kind of response to macron, is that there was a question asked by
"washington post" reporter about khashoggi in terms of donald trump's talk about saudi arabia and the deployment of troops. and donald trump did not answer the question. he pivoted the question of he's going to meet with erdogan. donald trump is not committed to the post world war ii consensus. it makes sense to me that macron and merkel and others don't look to the united states for leadership anymore. >> that's the point. the europeans are on their own and they're going to have to find their way through it. the problem they have they have a lot of things going on themselves. merkel is going to be leaving, macron is weak, italy's a mess, so on and so forth. it's hard to recreate some kind of a european force out of all of that. >> and today, back in the united states, the house intelligence committee is expected to vote on the impeachment report. members of the committee can now review the document.
and i tell chairman adam schiff says it will also be released to the public at some point today. if the committee votes to adopt the report, it will be sent to the judiciary committee. at the same time, chairman schiff also told msnbc last night that his panel's investigation of the president doesn't stop after tonight's vote. >> that's not the end of our investigation. so even while judiciary does its work, we will continue investigating, we're continuing to issue subpoenas, we're continuing to learn new information. that work goes on. >> meanwhile, house republicans are hitting back with their own minority report arguing that democrats have failed to establish that president trump committed any impeachable offenses. a copy of the 123-page report says this. despite their best efforts, the evidence gathered during the democrats partisan and one-sided impeachment inquiry doesn't -- does not support that president trump pressured ukraine to
investigate his political rival to benefit the president in the 2020 presidential election. the evidence does not establish any impeachable offense. house intel chairman adam schiff hit back at the gop report writing in part tellingly the minority dismisses this as just part of the president's outside the beltway thinking. it is more accurately outside the law and constitution and a violation of his ouath of offic. joe, i'm trying to envision that picture of the republicans putting together -- house republicans putting together that report. you have would have to literally put on blinders to write it that way. >> well, you actually would just have to go into it going -- >> i'm going to lie. >> -- this guy's guilty as hell, he's as guilty as hell, we can't argue the facts because they're not on our side. we can't argue the law because the law's not on our side.
we just have to argue. that's all they've been doing. they've been making fools of themselves over the weekend. they have been adopting, as we said, vladimir putin's talking points. talking points that the intelligence community warned them was part of a russian propaganda effort, but they were so desperate to defend the president of the united states instead of the united states of america itself, that they actually pushed -- pushed these talking points. which i think, willie, it just -- it begs the question at this point in the proceedings, the democratic party and nancy pelosi, and i certainly understood this, they wanted to narrow the focus to ukraine to keep it simple. the president clearly violated his oath of office in what he did, it was easily proven, it's been proven over the past several weeks. he committed bribery. he bribed a foreign leader. said, listen, i will actually
give you $400 million in military aid but you have to give me dirt on my political opponent. he got caught red handed. the republicans aren't doing anything about that. so the question is this. if they're going to act in such bad faith that they're now assets of russia using, again, vladimir putin's propaganda that the intel communities, all 17 intel agencies have instructed them, why not expand this impeachment inquiry? why not bring up the illegal payoff to stormy daniels a week or so before the election that has a man sitting in jail who helped orchestrate that illegal payoff? because that illegal payoff would have landed any senator, would have landed any member of congress, would have landed any candidate for any federal law office in a federal penitentiary. so why don't they expand it it
those illegal acts? to the ten acts in the mueller report that very clearly laid out obstruction of justice? why not show the american people the full breadth and the full scope of donald trump's corruption, especially coming on the heels of an attorney general trying to run roughshod over, you know, an inspector general's upcoming report. an attorney general who's lied to congress already, committed -- i mean, there is nothing but lawlessness in this administration. shouldn't the united states congress go on record and really show the american people the full width of this corrupt, corrosive administration? >> the democrats in the house, the plan had been to get a vote before the end of the year. that's going to be tough now already based on the schedule that they've laid out, jaw dishnary bringing in more
witnesses and now they're starting his chapter in the story. maybe they do decide to open it up at this point, because that 123 page document put out by republicans now ensliens ahrine confirms what we've heard from them is that they're going to look the other way come hell or high water. the idea that you can sit and listen to those two weeks of testimony from nonpartisan officials, many of whom worked in the trump administration, many of whom were appointed by the trump administration and think that nothing went wrong here there are was nothing to see here, that they concede no points, that he didn't do anything wrong, then that's just willful and you have a group of people who are sitting and listening to that testimony, obviously with their minds made up. we knew that when we would hear devin nunes's statements that the mind was made up. but these are not people who are going to be swayed. they are not people will ever on swayed. people we see out talking publicly, john kennedy again
yesterday waving op-eds staying was udlan meddled. despite fiona hill's warning to the congressmen in that room it was irresponsible to chase that conspiracy theory. the idea, joe, that republicans could have sat in that room or watched on television if they weren't on the committee for those two weeks and listened to those witnesses and conclude in 123 pages there that there was nothing to see here is proposter russ and tells us what we knew all along, which is they were never going vote for impeachment in the first place. >> and their takeaway, mika, after two weeks of damning testimony is, one, that the only way they defend the president is by first, again, using propaganda from russia that 17 intel agencies have struck down. and that the intel community actually warned them not to use. said that vladimir putin has been using it for two years. that's one of their defenses.
their second defense is saying that -- is pointing to polls that show a majority of americans want donald j. trump impeached and removed from office. 50% of americans want him impeached and removed from office. bill clinton at the height of impeachment in the late '90s only 29% wanted him removed. so republicans have no legs to stand on legally or factually. and if they're going to show such bad faith they're actually letting vladimir putin send them their talking points. i think democrats need to expand this. they need to bring in all of the high crimes and merchandise tis that this president has commit and lay it bear for not only america, but for history and future generations to look back and see that at least one branch of this government was willing
to be held accountable. stand up and be counted to speak truth to the president of the united states, his corrupt attorney general, and a political party that's now taking marching orders and their talking points from vladimir putin. >> absolutely. and still ahead on "morning joe," we've got so much to get to. and that was before the president's 52-minute stream of consciousness in london. more of the key takeaways from his wide ranging comments this morning. plus, a new split emerges between two of the leading candidates for president, joe biden and pete buttigieg. the democrats are clashing over health care with one accusing other of stealing his plan. you're watching "morning joe." we'll be right back. . you're watching "morning joe." we'll be right back.
copd makes it hard to breath so to breath better i started once-daily anoro. ♪go your own way copd tries to say go this way i say i'll go my own way with anoro. ♪go your own way once-daily anoro contains two medicines called bronchodilators that work together to significantly improve lung function all day and all night. do not use anoro if you have asthma. anoro won't replace rescue inhalers for sudden symptoms and should not be used more than once a day.
tell your doctor if you a heart condition, high blood pressure, glaucoma, prostate, bladder or urinary problems. these may worsen with anoro. call your doctor if worsened breathing, chest pain, mouth or tongue swelling, problems urinating, vision changes, or eye pain while taking anoro. the most common side effects are sore throat, diarrhea and pain in the arms and legs. ask your doctor about once-daily anoro to start treating your copd. ♪go your own way save at anoro.com
former vice president joe biden claims he does not need president obama's endorsement in the upcoming election. that's not my question. my question is about this. aboard his no malarky bus tour of iowa, yesterday, biden told reporters that obama's backing is not needed even if he is one of the last democratic candidates standing. just backing up a little bit, no malarky, does that work? i mean, i kinda like that, i think. >> no malarky is okay. >> what is malarky? >> you know what -- >> it's a word for bs. >> why can't it is a bs? >> he's irish so it says malarky. >> i think it's a fantastic campaign slogan for cork in 1956. so -- >> well, he's just embracing -- he's owning it then. it's just like that's what he's been saying. >> you know, he's -- i'm a '50s guy. i go around saying things that
dudes in their mid-80s say. he is owning it and putting it on the side of his bus. >> then i kind of like it. >> hey, listen, i'm a big believer in, you know, you be true to yourself. >> okay. >> and if that makes him more comfortable on the campaign trail, so be it, jedi. which of course if i ever run a campaign, that's what i'm going to have on the side of my bus. >> there you go. >> so be it, jedi, with a picture of the emperor going just like that. that's what i say to my kids every time they talk back to me. now i'll get to the story. when asked about a "politico" report that obama said the former vice president, quote, really didn't have it when it comes to connecting with voters, biden replied, quote, he may have said that and if it's true, and he said it, there's truth to it. >> oh. >> biden told bloomberg news that he was the one during their successful campaign who was sent to key states such as pennsylvania and colorado to
energize voters. biden also dished about his fellow 2020 democratic opponents scoffing at the notion that senator elizabeth warren is building enthusiasm and accusing mayor pete buttigieg of stealing his health care plan. okay. >> let's bring in the cofounder of axios, jim vandehei. jim, somebody apparently has spiked joe biden's milk of magnesia. he's coming out fighting. >> stop it. >> you're on a roll this morning, joe. >> no, no, not -- and you know what i call it? no malarky, lad. no malarky. >> we'll have a no malarky exchange here. i think biden sees a couple things happen. one, with elizabeth warren he feels like she made an epic mistake in endorsing medicare for all without an option to keep your private insurance. so he's going to keep the foot on gas on going after her. when pete buttigieg, who he sees as the biggest threat in terms
of somebody who could win over moderates and centrists, he knows that buttigieg has a massive problem with african-american voters, particularly in south carolina, but certainly in the polls nationally. so he has every reason to be a little bit more aggressive and try to wind that gden that gap him and buttigieg and elizabeth warren. i think he's irritated. you think about bloomberg getting into the race. bloomberg called him early on and promised he wasn't going to get in the race it biden was in there. now bloomberg's in there and he's going to spend gobs of money and that money's aims at people biden thinks he should be able to win. i think a little bit is oich offensive, a little bit is defensive. i think obama has been very clear that he's not going to endorse anybody it's a democrat versus a republican race. >> what about the biden strategy? how are they feeling that we're
not doing great in the polls early, iowa and new hampshire, but those states aren't representative and come nevada and south carolina and rolling into super tuesday we'll be fine sitting right where we want to be? we'll win big, the argument goes, in south carolina and that will change the conversation. do they worry that if pete buttigieg or elizabeth warren or bernie sanders takes those first two states they're in a tough hole to start off? >> what biden believes right now is that he probably is more confident than he was three or four weeks ago. he feels like his theory of the case is proving to be stronger than the others. that the party's not as liberal as elizabeth warren thinks it is, that the voters in those early states are not as liberal as she is or bernie sanders. buttigieg is rookie who can't win minority votes. he feels like he's better positioned than the other four. what you said is the most likely scenario. in the first four races there's probably going to be a mix of winners. that's why bloomberg is in the race. he thinks it's going to be a hot
mess. people will win a state here and state there and it's going to be wide open heading into the super tuesday and he's going to do what billionaires do, he's going to spend and pour a ton of money into ads more than other candidates combined. they'll all be about him as mr. fix it and mr. predictable and hope that he can throw himself into the mix. and he had a bad entry. listen, to start in the polls at 3%, 4%, 5% is not great, but he's spent 30, 40, 50 million whatever he's spent and there's a slight uptick in the polls that you saw yesterday. he's at 5%, 6%. the question have can he move up? i'm skeptical because he seems like he's so centrist and too probably new york city for the democratic party that's looking for something new. but he's betting his reputation in some ways betting his news organization on it. >> well, steve rattner, obviously you've been very close with the mayor for some time. we'll put that out there right now. but, since he's gotten into the race, there has been -- there's
been a telling shift at least in the last two weeks of november and the first week of december . of course the only thing that shaps what happens happens is what happens in february and beyond. for now, people are starting to realize that the democratic party, that the democratic base, does not look like democratic twitter, that it's more like the democratic party that reverend al talks about, which is a conservative with a small sea democratic party that actually looks down upon what reverend -- what we used to call limousine liberals but what reverend al and a lot of people call latte liberals. it is a centrist party, which should be a shock because every poll over the past two years has shown that democrats want a more centrist candidate than they do a progressive. >> yeah. so a couple things.
first of all, it's not a coincidence that mike bloomberg waited till this last minute to announce. he thought about it back in the spring and his conclusion back in the spring was there were too many strong candidates and there really wasn't room for him in the mix. as this has all unfolded, a bit along the lines of what willie was going through or jim, this gets more complicated because at the moment biden is polling fourth or fifth in new hampshire and iowa, we all know no democrat has been nominated without winning at least one of those two states and most of the successful ones have won both except for bill clinton in '92 when tim harkin was running in iowa and saugus was running in new hampshire. so you're looking at a scenario where mayor pete and/or warren and/or possibly sanders could somehow slit up iowa and new hampshire, maybe biden wins nevada, maybe he wins vsouth
carolina. his campaign said he would raise $10 million in october and november. he raised $15 million in the third quarter, 9 million left. he's going to be spending money in january and february to get through the early states. my point is he could well be approaching a super tuesday where almost 45% of the delegates are going to be selected without the noncompete. not just against the bloomberg, but even against a buttigieg or warren or sanders who's fundraising continues at a very robust pace. >> you've brought up pete buttigieg. he's seeing his first statewide ad in south carolina today entitled welcomed me. it's a part of the campaign's $2 million ad buy which aimed to better connect buttigieg with the racially diverse state. here's part of the 30-second spot. >> in our white house, you won't have to shake your head and ask yourself whatever happened to i was hungry and you fed me? i was a stranger and you
welcomed me. when i say we've got unify the american people, it doesn't mean pretending that we're all the same. it means unifying around issues from wages and family leave to gun violence and immigration. >> eddie, how's he doing as he's trying to sort of approach a segment of the population that polls show that he just suffers? >> i think the campaign is making a concerted effort. he just sat down recently at green lift christian church in north carolina. >> how'd he do? >> he did fairly well, i think. it's important for him to talk about these policy issues in a way that really speak to black communities. but i think we have to understand this in two ways. one is that he has to connect with black voters and, two, he has to be seen as someone who can deliver policy initiatives that will address the circumstances of black communities. that is to say that it's not just simply about appealing to emotion. >> pandering. >> it's not pandering to black
communities, it's about policies on the ground. i think this is really important going back to our earlier discussion. when we use these labels of ken tryst and conservative and the like, we might be overstating the matter. it might very will be the case that what people are looking for is change. and that we're still in a change cycle and the idea of political labels kind of defining how we want change may actually get us into some trouble. and so you might have someone who's liberal, centrist, progressive, all of them want change. it seems to me that if joe biden doesn't understand that, if pete buttigieg doesn't understand that, if elizabeth warren doesn't, they're all going to find themselves in a situation where -- >> and jim vandehei, axios is looking at african-american men as a focus for democrats. tell us about it. >> yeah. i mean, the last election you had african american turnout decrease for the first time in 20 years, which is concerning for democrats. and at the same time you had 13%
of african-american men vote for trump. i think it was 4% of african-american women voted for him. you have a lot of campaigns, buttigieg, booker, others who are reaching out specifically to african-american men to see if they can connect and also jackup turnout, make sure if there is higher turnout that african-american men are voting for democrats. and i think what eddie said was really really important. i do think that the biggest indicator of who wins nominations, who wins the presidency, are the people who are most sort of comfortable in their skin, who voters have all different types feel like are the real deal and are authentic. people are much easier to sort of shift the shape of their ideology than we might think. i think that was the great lesson of donald trump. look at all the things republicans now believe we would have thought unthinkable four or five years ago. i don't know that that dynamic is that much different inside the democratic party if the right person can connect and can seem like an authentic person who can beat trump and lead to
some sort of change. >> all right. jim vandehei, thank you very much. >> thank you. coming up, former white house counsel don mcgahn. we'll talk about that new court ruling. plus, congressman duncan hunter called the criminal case against him a witch-hunt. but now the california lawmaker is set to plead guilty. "morning joe's" coming right back. o plead guilty. "morning joe's" coming right back. ♪oh there's no place like home for the holidays.♪ ♪'cause no matter how far away you roam.♪ ♪when you pine for the sunshine of a friendly gaze.♪ ♪for the holidays you can't beat home sweet home.♪
the united states postal service goes the extra mile to bring your holidays home. - [narrator] forget about vacuuming for up to a month. shark iq robot deep-cleans and empties itself into a base you can empty once a month. and unlike standard robots that bounce around, it cleans row by row. if it's not a shark, it's just a robot. laso you can enjoy it even ifst you're sensitive. se. yet some say it isn't real milk. i guess those cows must actually be big dogs. sit! i said sit! and my lack of impulse control,, is about to become your problem. ahh no, come on. i saw you eating poop earlier. hey! my focus is on the road, and that's saving me cash with drivewise. who's the dummy now? whoof! whoof!
43 past the hour. welcome whack back to "morning we have danny cevallos with us. we'll get into some of the legal headlines this morning. a u.s. district judge denied the justice department's quest for a stay on testimony from former white house counsel don mcgahn. in a 17-page opinion, judge brown jackson rejected the department's attempts to hold off her earlier ruling requiring
mcgahn to appear before congressional investigators. judge jackson argued that, quote, further delay of the judiciary's committee's enforcement of the valid subpoena causes grave harm to both the committee's investigation and the interests of the public more broadly. the judge also decided to lift a temporary stay she issued last week while the cause involving mcgahn moved up to the u.s. court of appeals. that hearing is scheduled for january 3rd. so, danny, will we hear from don mcgahn? how long does this take? >> it may take longer than you think. now, the judge decided that when -- i'll give you an example. when losers at a court want the court to not put the order into effect, they ask for what's called a stay. and to get a stay, you need to show that it's really likely you're going to win and you're going to suffer some real serious harm if the court doesn't stop this order from going into effect. >> and remind us, what's holding him back from talking? >> the white house has indicated
that they don't want him to testify and so that's what the doj is going to be appealing. and that's why we may not hear from mcgahn any time soon, because the appeal's going to go up to the circuit court and this may be delayed even further. >> and why might it be that the white house wouldn't want him to testify? did we get hints in the mueller report? >> we did. don mcgahn was a central figure in the mueller report as someone who was very close to donald trump. >> and not happy. >> and not happy, yes. and he knows a lot of things, owes he's spoken to the president on many occasions. he's featured prominently in the mueller report if the you are the house democrats, he is somebody that you would want to hear from. >> joe, is it possible we'll never hear from don mcgahn? >> anything's possible in trump's washington. but, danny, the stay was lifted. why can't they move quickly to get him to the hill before january 3rd? >> they can try.
subpoena power is powerful on paper but when it comes to enforcement, it's more an issue of compromise. the house can try, but that may result in more legal battles and more appellate court proceedings. >> but, danny, what's the justice department's next move? so they lost, the stay was lift. she's saying you have to testify. it is in the interest of congress and the public more generally. if congress now tries to compel don mcgahn to testify, what's their next legal move? >> it's more than that. congress could even use some of its inherent power to go get don mcgahn and bring him to the capital building. but they're not likely to do that because, as i've said, in most cases subpoenas in court cases are a question of enforcement. you can send out the u.s. marshal service, you can send out deputies to bring somebody to the courthouse. that doesn't happen the same way in congress. and more often than not, it
becomes an issue of compromise. but they could do that. >> danny, in watergate didn't congress actually threaten to imprison some of nixon's aides who were refusing to comply with the subpoenas? >> that's right. that's exactly what happened in watergate. and that could happen here. but we've also seen historically that congress doesn't want to go to that level. whether it's republicans or democrats, that is an extreme measure. and what that means functionally is that congress's power to subpoena may be broad on paper, but in practice it's really not all that broad. >> but, see, and that's the thing, danny. in practice, administrations like the trump administration have completely stripped them of that power. we saw the same thing at times with the obama administration. i guess my question is, why wouldn't congress exercise their article one powers?
they have a court ruling that's supportive of them and say to don mcgahn, hey, don, a federal judge has told you you have to testify. and they rejected the stay of the doj. so, don, you've got two choices. you can either come testify willingly, or we're going to send marshals after you. and if you continue to do it, we're going to -- we may even take the extraordinary measure that they took during watergate and possibly jail you for ignoring a federal judge's order. and, danny, the only reason i bring this up is there's so many people, it was a republican party that i heard during the obama administration that was frustrated at people just ignoring congressional subpoenas. now you're seeing the same thing on the other side. so, yes, the practice has actually stripped congress, the legislative branch, of any of its powers. why not make a point of don mcgahn? they've got a ruling in their
favor. >> because don mcgahn isn't actually adverse, necessarily, to house democrats. it's a strange situation because mcgahn is nominally represented by the government, the executive branch. >> right. >> but their interests aren't perfectly aligned. don mcgahn -- >> all the more reason to lean on him, danny, all the more reason. we're talking about precedent here. high doesn't congress lean on this guy and set a precedent? >> they could. and they might decide strategically that's the right thing to do. but they also risk turning don mcgahn who may be a favorable witness for democrats into an adversarial hostile witness. but they certainly can exercise that power and try to do that immediately if they want to. >> all right. >> i just got to say, mika, for the precedent it would be worth it. even if don mcgahn became a hostile -- because these subpoenas have been ignored for years. >> exactly. >> by democratic administrations and republican administrations alike. and the subpoena power of the united states congress has been
made meaningless through the years. they have a federal judge's ruling, they have a responsibility now to enforce that suspect by any means -- legal means possible. >> well now to this. two associates of rudy giuliani are likely to be hit with more charges in addition to the ones they are already facing for allegedly funneling foreign money into u.s. political candidates. the disclosure was made during a court hearing in new york related to the case of lev parnas and igor fruman. the duo was arrested last month for violating campaign finance laws. they have pleaded not guilty. giuliani has acknowledged that parnas and fruman assisted in his efforts to dig up dirt on the bidens. prosecutors seized thousands of files, data, and dozens of cell phones from parnas and fruman as well as two other giuliani associates charged in the case.
a prosecutor told the court monday that parnas has not mode of provide. the pass wards to his phones despite numerous requests and the fbi is using its technology to try to unlock the phones. and what, danny, white be unlocked in all of this with these two characters and rudy giuliani himself? >> the prosecutors and defense attorneys are like wishing it was back in the 1990s before the data era and these tear roo rah bites and gigabytes of information that are contained just in phones or laptop computers. but that's the kind of thing that reveals everything about somebody's life. and so prosecutors in sifting through all of this evidence may be uncovering more information damaging to these defendants. but i have to say, i'm a little surprised because i more expected that there would be a rush to a guilty plea and a cooperation agreement, not more charges. that signals to me that if there are more charges coming, that perhaps there isn't a
cooperation agreement in the mix, at least today. >> and rudy giuliani continues to raise questions as to whether or not he'll be charged with something, does he not? >> he's a private individual. he is not protected by the cloak of acting at the behest of the state department or something like that. so the fact that all of these people around rudy giuliani are being investigated for any prospective client, that is something that should make someone very, very nervous. if you start noticing that your friends and family are being investigated but you are conspicuously absent from the investigation, that's a good reason to be concerned. >> and in the case of trump, you take a look at all the people who are already in jail. so let's now to this. california congressman duncan hunter is expected to bleed guilty today in san diego to misusing campaign funds. a criminal case that he once called a witch-hunt. in an interview, the republican lawmaker announced he'll plead guilty to one count of misusing
campaign funds saying he's responsible for not properly monitoring the money. prosecutors had charged hunter and his wife saying they convert and stole more than a quarter million dollars in campaign funds for their own personal use, including trips to hawaii and school tuition for their children. hunter's wife pleaded guilty to conspiring to misuse of campaign funds in june and was expected to testify against her husband at his trial which was scheduled for january 22nd. in the interview, hunter added his only hope is the judge does not sentence his wife because, quote think the quote, i think my kids need a mom at home. this whole thing is sad. what is he up against? >> i encourage everybody to take a look at this indictment against duncan hunter, because the allegations are pretty shocking. they show some major need of money in the indictment for this family and some use of campaign
funds that were very clearly at least from the indictment related to personal benefit. vacations, meals for the kids, dentists bills. in a lot of these cases you can make a colorable argument that these expenses were campaign related. and sometimes it can be a bit of a yoga exercise to stretch that far. but this indictment, if true, all those allegations -- >> paid for tuition? >> how are you going to relate that to a campaign? you can't do it. your kids dentist bills, restaurants, and even allegations not too thinly veiled of romantic dalliances with other folks, not the representatives wife. these are all the kinds of things that paint a broad picture some of real misuse of campaign funds, the kind that really can't be explained away. >> so in this case what got him from a witch-hunt to a guilty plea? was it just the evidence before him? >> yes. sometimes. in this case he had an argument in the beginning, look, i'm one
of the republicans that first came out supporting donald trump so you're lumping me in with the witch-hunt of donald trump. it's an interesting theory, a good public relations argument. but, anyone causally reading this indictment against him, and it's publicly available, will see that this is anything but a witch-hunt. and this is anything but just some bad management of money during a campaign. if it's true that these campaign funds were used for such personal expenses as ski trips and dinners and drinks and fun that were completely unrelated to the campaign, and they are if it's a family vacation, that's not part of your campaign. i'm sure joe can tell us all about that, because he had to campaign at one point. and anyone who's been involved in the campaign can know there's a bright line between your personal family expenses and vacations and fun and campaign-related expenses. and this one appears to be a bright line. >> yeah, willie, you never come close to that line for two things, one, your office expenses and also your campaign
expenses. i mean, you're told every office, i know we had -- i talked about mary reed before. she -- she -- you just know to get in there and you follow the advice of the person that you've hired that knows those laws and you just don't come close to the line. unfortunately, he did and apparently went well over that line several times. >> yeah. and these examples are pretty blatant which is why he's not pleading guilty. one more for you, danny. the supreme court seems unlikely to reach a decision on its first second amendment case in a decade after arguments alluded to the case being moot. the case is over a law in new york that prevented citizens from i transporting guns outside of their home. justice ruth bader ginsberg echoed the sentiment saying what's left of this case? and another justice agreed adding the other side has thrown
in the towel. you're asking us to opine on a law that's not on the books anymore. however, conservative justices alito and gorsuch argued there was enough to take on the case. the court will issue its decision by late june. danny in a nutshell what is this case about and why do the liberal ring of the court seem to be kissing it off? >> it's exceedingly rare for a. to get everything the. wants in a court, and it's rarer for that. to be ups plaintiff to be upset about it. they got everything they wanted because when they challenged this new york city rule, it wasn't a law, it was just an nypd rule, the government rushed to repeal it because they knew they didn't want it to end up at the supreme court. so now that it's at the supreme court, there's no longer any law prohibiting gun owners from transporting their firearms. that law is gone and it can never come back because the legislature subsequently passed a law essentially prohibiting
it. so, under the rules of court, you have to have an actual case or controversy. and if there's no long air law f longer a law for anyone to be worried about, there nos longer there's no longer a controversy. they're arguing they repealed the rule so they wouldn't have to deal with the supreme court deciding the issue. even though we've gotten everything we want, the gun advocates say we're entitled to a supreme court decision on this broader constitutional issue. >> where does it end? do they take it up? >> most likely, if i were a betting man and i'm not, i would say that they'll decline to take it. it's the safer thing to do. the case really is mootute and y would be giving an advisory opinion. >> the kbort court is so concer with it with a small "c" when it comes to any casesless l, let a
gun cases when they did say that americans had the right to keep arms as long as it was for protection, but time and time again they've refused to accept cases that have come their way. they even allowed gun makers to face liability, financial liability for the new town shootings. they've refused to act on connecticut's very expansive gun control laws that have been in place for five, six years. you've only had justice thomas actually say, come on, let's hear these cases. i just, again, since it's mute, i just don't see the court taking up this case. >> all right. danny, thank you very much. great to have you on. a lot of questions to deal with. coming up, is bill barr about to run to the president's rescue yet again? first he helped trump escape damage from the mueller report. then, the doj declined to
investigate the ukraine call. now barr might be ready to dispute his department's independent report on the origins of the russia investigation. all roads seem to lead to vladimir putin. "morning joe" is coming back in one minute. imir putin. "morning joe" is coming back in one minute. to our cancer patients- like viola. when she was diagnosed with breast cancer, her team at ctca created a personalized care plan that treated her cancer and strengthened her spirit. so viola could focus on her future. their future. this is how we inspire hope. this is how we heal. cancer treatment centers of america. appointments available now.
turkey respond by saying that he was brain dead, which is interesting. now nato serves a great purpose. it got to be unfair for the united states because the united states was paying a disproportionate amount. and i heard that president macron said nato is brain dead. i think that's very insulting to a lot of different forces, inclueding a man that does a very good job in running nato. >> it's just -- it must be very early for the president. >> he's converted.
nato suddenly is -- serves a useful purpose. >> he's confused. >> nato good. macron bad. i still wonder if he understands the united states money is not his. and he can -- >> no, he doesn't. >> he doesn't? >> it is something that he still believes that the united states gets money from nato. that they pay into this magical pot. >> yeah. >> that leprechauns dance aflouaround in brussels and they go and put their gold coins in and it's the magical defense fund. it's ridiculous. yet donald trump keeps repeating it. richard haass, just a general point and then tell us what you think about donald trump attacking macron and, of course, bringing up his good friend erdogan to actually double down on the attacks on macron. but, i think most americans probably unaware of the fact that the european union spends
more money on defense that be just about any -- any other nation in -- and of course it's not a nation, but we're talking about nato and the europe oncommunity thatoeuropeian community that's been attacked for mott spending their fair share. they spend more than russia, correct? >> they spend 300 billion with a "b" dollars a year on defense. it's extraordinary. biggest problem with it, joe, they don't spend it collectively. each country makes its own decisions so the whole is much less than the sum of its parts. issue is not how much the europeans are spending, it's how they're spending it. that ought to be the focus of the president's comments. this week he defended nato twice. first he used it -- he said impeachment's wrong because it's getting in the way of the nato summit and now he's criticized the french president for calling
nato brain dead. this is a president who for three years has been consistently critical of nato, has raised questions about whether we go to bat for montenegro or other countries. he's been clearly soft on russia. he's after the allies for what they spend or don't spend on defense. so, again, two full -- two full-throated defenses of nato in a week is quite extraordinary for a president who is, shall we say, rather critical of american allies not just in europe but as we also heard this morning in south korea. >> isn't this a lesson in the attempts at flattering president trump to win him over are futile? toen variety him to your bapara, to try to win him to your side of an argument and to be his ally, in the end he's not going to stand there with you. he's going to sit there at the nato meeting and attack you before the world. >> well, with the president
relationships are vulnerable or perishable. the fact that the president within 24 hours before coming to paris introduces a whole new round of tariffs, or threatens to, i think no one has figured out perhaps with the exception of the japanese prime minister, i don't think any leader of a country has figured out how to navigate this relationship with donald trump. he is an outlier, shall we say? >> well, too unpredictable. >> and the problem with that is alliances are based on predictability. you wake up in the morning and assume things. and what donald trump has done is turn that on its head. now you wake up in the morning and you have to read your twitter feed because you don't know where the united states stands. people see how the president is attacking south korea, how he turned away from the kurds and go that could be us tomorrow. and without that now reliability and predictability, he's putting
an awful lot at risk. >> rich haas, steve rattner, eddie glaude jr. all still with us. joining the conversation, associate editor of "the washington post" and political analyst, eugene robinson. and columnist and editor at the "washington post," rouge. she's the author of a new book "supreme ambition: brett kavanaugh and the conservative takeover" we'll get to that in a moment. >> and we like people being excited about being on this show. excited that ruth's on the show. willie, gene is so excited to be here that he said, you know what some if the only camera you have for me is in the middle of pennsylvania avenue and -- >> are you -- >> i can git get het hit by carl take that chance. >> gene, are you okay? >> he has a couple of interns
blocking traffic on either side of the shot. >> anything for "morning joe." i will stand in the middle -- >> gene, i had the exact same thought, the differencesy was going difference difference is i was going to keep it to myself. >> gene is one of my most valuable columnists. better be careful here, gene. >> it's very exciting. it's like the streets of london in 1940. if gene breaks out -- >> it's washington. >> it's washington, exactly. we know who he's patterning himself after. all right. attorney general william barr has reportedly told associates he disagrees with the justice department's inspector general on one of the key findings in his anticipated report. according to the "washington post," barr has not been convinced of doj inspector general michael horowitz' conclusion that the fbi had
appropriate grounds to launch the investigation into the trump campaign in 2016. according to people familiar with the matter. the inspector general report is currently being finalized and will be released next week. the attorney general has faced criticism in the past for publicly defending the president and for giving off the appearance of not being completely impartial. it is unclear how barr will react publicly, but it is a standard practice for every inspector general report to include a written response from the department. former justice department spokesman matt miller tweeted about the report, quote return real it is not uncommon for an ag to disagree with an ig finding because it is too tough on the doj. i have never heard of an ig confirming the department did things correctly and an ag disputing it. just shocking partisan behavior. in response to "the washington post" article, a spokeswoman
from the justice department released a statement saying the inspector general's investigation is a credit to the department of justice. rather than speculating, people should read the report for themselves next week. watch the inspector general's testimony before the senate judiciary committee and draw their own conclusions about these important matters. joe. >> right. i don't know what to make of that statement, willie, given -- given the article that was out yesterday. this is an attorney general, though, who misrepresented the mueller report weeks before it was released because he wanted to spin it most favorably for the president of the united states and he did so in a way that even robert mueller believed twisted the words from the proper context. this is also an attorney general who lied, committed perjury in front of congressional committees. for some reason they haven't decided to bring him up on
charges for that. and here, as matt miller said, if these reports are accurate, here's an attorney general who actually is attacking an inspector general for not being critical enough of his own agencies. again, you have donald trump, you have vladimir putin, and you have william barr now pretty maids all in a row lined up wanting to disparage u.s. intel agencies at all costs. >> well, that back and forth that mika just laid out is a pretty good snapshot of where the justice department is right now where you have the ig of the justice department preparing a report. you have the head of the justice department, the attorney general going after that report, and then the justice department spokesperson putting out a statement that basically implicitly criticizes the attorney general by saying the report is good and well founded. but what he's organizing, attorn arguing, is that for starting
the 2016 investigation into the trump campaign with russia is ill founded, is not based in anything that should have been investigate spotted you have, s investigateed. now we have seen at the top of the justice department someone who like all the republicans we've been talking about in congress this morning have decided to put the president and the defense of the president over their obligation to the country, over their obligation to the constitution. it's not the first time, gene robinson, that we've seen this from attorney general barr. he's made a habit of going out and make public statements that overstep where an attorney general would be to go out and defend the president of the united states. >> this is really disgraceful. why should we expect anything else from william barr at this point? but he really is functioning like donald trump's personal attorney. and not as the attorney general of the united states. and this is -- i can't believe
that someone with his experience, with his resume, with his career in washington would want to end it this way, basically, as a trumpist hack who is going out of his way and doing all these extraordinary things in what i think will ultimately be a veain attempt t protect the reputation of president donald trump. it's ridiculous. you know, really, an attorney general saying, you know, you're not critical enough of my agencies, it's never happened. and for good reason. it's just crazy. >> well, and if you want to know just the depths of the attorney general's bad faith, look to past interviews where he's actually dug up a conspiracy theory if you look at the
timeline, every bit is crack pot as the crowdstrike conspiracy theory that some poor, pathetic republicans are trotting around carrying vladimir putin's water. he has argued that the steele dossier was the cause for the start of the mueller investigation. ruth markus, that was disproven a year ago. that is a lie. the timeline doesn't match up. and for william barr as an attorney general to create these conspiracy theories shows, again, the depths of his bad faith. that's a talking point from talk radio that say lie thatis i lie disproven time and time again. t"the wall street journal's" talked about it. if you look at the timeline, there's no way the steele
dossier was responsible for the start of the mueller investigation. >> right. and he, a while ago, talked about the fbi spying on the trump campaign. i am astonished by this, because i've known attorney general barr since the reagan administration when he was a justice department official. and i know that he privately told people when he came back to the department to be attorney general a second time for president trump that he was going back there to help the justice department and to salvage the reputation of the justice department. and, of course, as with the parallel with secretary pompeo, he's been doing anything but. and i think we should watch and judge for ourselves and see what the report says and see what he has to say. but, i assume that "the washington post" report is accurate. and, if so, it's just another example of the attorney general trying to have it both ways. it's tails -- heads trump and i win, tails truth loses. if you agree with the findings
of robert mueller or if you agree with the findings of inspector general horowitz, then, okay, fine, this is great, see, it proves our point. but if you disagree with them, then you get another bite at the apple and say they're totally wrong and i disagree with them about that. so let's see what happens. but this is just really disappointing behavior on the part of the attorney general. >> well, ruth, let's talk about your book. "supreme ambition" and where impeachment feels a lot like kavanaugh 2.0. make the case. >> well, you know, in both cases republicans are worked up over bad motives rather than dealing with the facts at hand. so with justice kavanaugh during the confirmation hearings republicans were unhappy and s understandably so, that the kristi chris seen it blasey forward are
ford allegations came up and they will do anything to stop kavanaugh so we can't take this seriously. similarly with impeachment we've heard devin nunes and a lot of other people arguing, well, democrats have been out to get president trump, they were talking about impeaching him even before he was sworn into office. and so therefore, all of this is tainted. my point is, look at the facts. if the facts are serious enough in the case of justice kavanaugh to warrant not confirming him, in the case of president trump to warrant impeaching him, those need to be taken seriously and motive shouldn't matter in that situation. it goes to this underlying and just reflects of tribalism that we're experiencing in the trunt today. >> country today. >> eddie, as they are acting as reflexively and tribal as they have to desperate to defend president trump that they're pair rogt vladimir putin's talking points, let me say it again, the intel community warned them about months ago,
why shouldn't the democrats go ahead and bring up the actual crimes that donald trump has committed, whether you're talking about the illegal payoff to stormy daniels that actually breached -- that actually broke campaign violation laws, much like duncan hunter is being charged with those. all the examples of obstruction of justice brought up in the mueller report. why should they just limit it to the ukraine investigation now? they wanted something that was quick, clean, easy. well, the republicans aren't allowing that. the republicans aren't participating. why don't they do something else? why don't they just show the world how corrupt and how core rose cy corrosive the trump presidency has been and let history be the judge? >> the ukraine story can be the
center of the narrative and you can build from there. i think it's important for the democrats. i want to have a this too. i think this links to your conversation with danny as well. the democrats or the representatives in the congress need to understand this debate on the scale that is actually happening. this is an argument about the separation of powers. this is an argument about congress's role, the house, the people's house. and it seems to me that given the way the republicans are playing this game, the democrats need to pull out all of their weapons. nebraska they ne they need to fight as hard as they can. and i think that involves expanding the story, keeping the nut on the graph in the center and using its power. and if that means drag downing mcgahn to the how fast representatives in front of the judiciary committee, then do so. i think you're absolutely right, joe. >> i actually have a question for ruth. i just want to go back to how we get here to impeachment and -- is it a parallel that you're
making between the brett kavanaugh fight, democrats and republicans, and impeachment and the facts in both cases? >> i think in both cases republicans were reluctant to grapple with the underlying facts. in the kavanaugh confirmation, and i talk about this extensively in my book, there were important witnesses, primarily a man named max steyer, who said he saw brett kavanaugh expose himself to another woman at yale. she doesn't at all, you know, fairness, she has told people that she does not remember that. but the fbi refused to interview max steyer because they were not instructed to do so by the white house. republican senators who were aware of this allegation refused to insist that max steyer be interviewed and, in fact, senator dianne feinstein, the ranking democrat, refused to get
this -- get max steyer interviewed. and similarly, republicans have just been unwilling to deal with serious facts and allegations against the president and the ukraine matter. >> well, and gene robinson, they've been denying them. and, again, let me say in case the kids haven't heard yet, they're actually using russian propaganda that they were warned about a couple months ago. i want to go back to what eddie brought up just a minute ago. and that is, democrats using everything legally that's, you know, at their disposal. and it seems to me a federal judge in the d.c. circuit has said don mcgahn has to testify. the justice department tries to get the stay. the federal judge of the d.c. circuit says, no, you don't get a stay for some very pressing public interest reasons. this needs to move forward. >> yeah. >> so, since it needs to move
forward, the democrats have a case before them that allows them to compel don mcgahn to come to capitol hill and testify. my question is, why don't they compel him over the next week to come? use that federal judge's ruling. wait, wait -- >> absolutely. >> danny said that's not how they do it. they try to compromise. you can't compromise with a party who's getting its talking points from vladimir putin, an ex-kgb agent who called the collapse of the soviet union the worst geopolitical crisis of the 20th century. >> absolutely. usually these things are worked out with -- with the white house, but you can't work anything out with this white house in terms of setting, you know, guardrails on the testimony of somebody like don
mcgahn. because they won't engage and all they'll do is stonewall. so i agree. i agree. and when we say democrats are to do this, let's keep in mind that they're not acting, you know, in the capacity of members of the dnc or anything like that, they're acting as a house of representatives. this is the house of representatives conducting an impeachment inquiry thinto the president of the united states. that's what's happening and that's their standing and stature for pursuing this inquiry to its end. and i think that -- so i think they should demand that mcgahn come in and try to find a way to haul him in. and i do believe that you can't just ignore all the other evidence of impeachable crimes that we've seen from donald trump. i realize they have kind of an eye on the clock, but that's, i
think, secondary at this point. there is -- there are matters of state and matters of principle at stake here. >> all right. >> joe, i can pipe up on the question of mcgahn's testimony with just one caution here? >> sure. >> i fully agree that there's an ongoing, flagrant article of impeachment occurring before us in plain sight in terms of the trump administration's ongoing obstruction of congress. but if you look at the judge's ruling, she made clear both that mcgahn is obligated to come and testify, but also that if he did come and testify there are all sorts of potential privileges, executive privilege and kpern clie attorney/client privilege that he might be able to use to avoid answering questions. even if the unlikely event we get him to turn up sometime soon, that doesn't mean we'll get all the answers that we want. >> all right. >> well, i just want to say that you need to get the precedent that people who are legally subpoenaed by congress have to
show up and testify. and, of course, the democrats and their lawyers can then make the fight on whether he's abusing -- abusing the claim of presidential privilege or any other privileges at some other point. but, mika, we both know how frustrated elijah cummings was that the house's oversight ability was hampered by the fact that the trump administration was acting lawless and said we're just not going to cooperate. >> that's right. that's right. ruth, thank you very much. your new book "supreme ambition: brett kavanaugh and the conservative takeover ". eugene robinson, thank you as well for being on this morning. >> thank you very much. traffic is about to pick up so i better get out of the way here. >> thanks for the traffic report while reading his column for the "washington post," entitled "we're losing our climate battle. we have no one but ourselves to
blame" and the house committee responsible for drafting articles of impeachment is expected to get the case against the president tonight. member of the judiciary committee karen bass will join us. for more on that key next step. you're watching "morning joe." we'll be right back. step. you're watching "morning joe." we'll be rightac bk. (employee) enterprise car sales has access to over
(kristen bell vo) looking to buy? enterprise makes it easy. laso you can enjoy it even ifst you're sensitive. se. yet some say it isn't real milk. i guess those cows must actually be big dogs. sit! i said sit! i'm a verizon engineer, and i'm part of the team building the most powerful 5g experience for america. it's 5g ultra wideband-- --for massive capacity-- --and ultra-fast speeds. almost 2 gigs here in minneapolis. that's 25 times faster than today's network in new york city. so people from midtown manhattan-- --to downtown denver-- --can experience what our 5g can deliver. (woman) and if verizon 5g can deliver performance like this in these places... it's pretty crazy. ...just imagine what it can do for you. ♪ and you know what they isay about curiosity. it'll ruin your house. so get allstate and be better protected from mayhem,
welcome back to "morning joe." it's 29 past the hour. we're going to get to karen bass in just a moment, congresswoman, but first, richard haass, you're looking at events, protest taking place in iran. give us an update on what's happening there. >> what we're seeing is in some ways the most intense focus reaction to the government in iran that we've seen in four years. this month is the 40th anniversary of the islamic republic. and what we've seen are people originally coming out in the
streets because of increases in fuel prices. but obviously -- almost like hong kong whatever the original reason people come out in the streets it grows. a lot of frustration over the clerical regime. we've seen hundreds of people killed. we've seen something on the order of close to 10,000 people imprisoned. that said, it's not a pretty prague necessar prognosis, but my sense is the regime will do whatever it needs to do to stay in power. it's an uneven fight and there's no scruples or restraint. so i expect more people will be killed if need be from the regime's view. but it shows you four decades after of this unique, shall we say, clerical/political regime was founded, there's tremendous push back, particularly over the quality of life. by the way, this is going on all over the world and the middle east. we see pushback against iranian influence in iraq. we see it in lebanon. but, again, i think iran has the
both the will and the ability to push back hard. so my guess is this goes on for a while. >> all right, richard, thank you. i know you need to take off. joining us now, member of of the house judiciary committee and the chair of the congressional black caucus, democratic congresswoman karen bass of california. good to have you on this morning. >> thank you. >> what do you believe is eminent in the impeachment proceedings that actually will not end up in the white house blocking someone talking? >> well, we begin our process tomorrow and, you know, we're going to begin by scholars talking about what are the groupds f grounds for impeachment? what is the impeachment process. i'm particularly interested in high crimes and misdemeanors and abuse of power, what is it and how would that lead to impeachment? >> so hearing from several key experts might help back up the facts that have been put forward
so far by the democrats. facts that are being disputed. i mean, you even have president trump on the world stage talking and mischaracterizing what the leader of ukraine has said to him. is it a fight for the truth? >> well, i mean, i think that the president has been consistent over these last three years. he has no understanding of what the truth is or no concern for what it is. but remember also, the report is going to be released tonight too. so the judiciary committee will have the report, will listen to experts, and then decide what to do. i think it's very important that we have a transparent process, but that we have a very thoughtful process as well. and i think that part of that -- part two of that begins tomorrow morning. >> does the process include you, democrats, having behind the scenes meetings with your republican counterparts? is there -- is there any potential that there could be a bridge between democrats and
republicans and at least calling out president on certain facts or are they just holding strong in their corner? >> well, i mean, so farther holding strong in their corner. and as you know, they've really not debated the facts. they debate the process, they've actually sound particularly juvenile because they've protested that we weren't having open hearings, there were no transcripts, that we hadn't had a floor vote. we've done all of that and they're still just arguing about the process. you know that they went ahead and released their own report refuting what the process was. they had a press conference about that yesterday. so we'll see exactly what the committee put forward, what they vote on, and we'll take all of that information under consideration. >> republicans leaning into the conspiracy theory refuted in public testimony that it was, in fact, ukraine that meddled in the 2016 election. congresswoman, for people watching this process at home, it sounds like in the intel committee you had all the witnesses come forward who could
provide evidence, fact witnesses. they didn't want to weigh in on whether or not the offensives were impeachable, they said that's not my job, i'm here to tell you what i saw and heard. it sounds like as the process moves to your committee, judiciary area you will have constitutional scholars who can answer the question of whether or not all that evidence we've seen now adds up to something impeachable. is that a fair assessment of where you all see your job? >> i think that's exactly right. i think that is an assessment. and i think that, you know, we're going dpob veto be very interested in that. you know we have been looking at the mueller report and obstruction of justice and now after the whistle-blower report it sent it off into in a slightly different direction. what the president did with ukraine has him interfering in the next election. the mueller report talked about what happened in the past. and i think that it is absolutely critical, and to me, that's the urgency with why we cannot wait until the next election. if you have the president
attempting to intervene in the next election, we need to be very clear about that and we need to stop him in his tracks. i think it's very clear that he was going to continue forward. you know he made the call to -- he had the call with the president of ukraine just a day or so after mueller testified before the judiciary committee, which means he essentially felt, well, hey, i'm off scott free, let me see how i can interfere in the next election. and that, to me, is particularly egregious. the other thing that concerns me is during this whole process when he came unhinged around the intelligence committee investigation, then you had him make the deal with erdogan that led to hundreds of people being killed in syria. so i'm concerned that when he is put in a corner, how irrational, how erratic can he be and what danger will he put our country? he's over there at the nato conference right now. you know he's going to have a
fit tomorrow at the hearing, so what kind of irrational, crazy statement is he going make tomorrow? what kind of new policy is he going to propose on the fly? all of this, to me, creates an incredible sense of urgency for why we need to put a halt to this behavior right now. now, whether that leads to impeachment, what articles we introduce and all of that, that remains to be scene. >> steve. >> congresswoman, it's steve rattner. you made the point that the stuff around the mueller report really relates to what happened in the last election, whereas, was happening with ukraine relates to what's happening in this election. i don't want to -- i'm not trying to put wards ords in you mouth, but does that mean that you think the mueller stuff should not be brought into this proceeding? >> no. no, it doesn't at all. i think we have to determine what we -- what articles there will be introduced, whether or not we introduce articles around obstruction of justice that relates to the mueller report
we'll see. but, you know, he's continued to obstruct congress by not allowing information to be received by the committees, not allowing people to come and testify. so his obstruction continues, whether you're talking about obstruction of justice or obstructing congress. >> all right. member of the judiciary committee congresswoman karen bass, thank you very much for being on this morning. and coming up, some of american history's greatest questions answered. a conversation with some of the country's best historians next on "morning joe." country's best historians next on "morning joe." [ song: johnny cash, "these are my people." ] ♪ these are my people ♪ ♪ these are the ones ♪ ♪ who will reach for the stars ♪ ♪ these are my people ♪ by the light of the earth, ♪ ♪ you can tell they are ours ♪ ♪ a new step to take ♪ and a new day will break ♪
yes, these are my people ♪ there are things we would change about work. and there are things we wouldn't. ♪ when work is worth it. work is worth it. work can be closer to home... pay more... make us proud. careerbuilder. work can work. find your work at careerbuilder.com ♪everybody needs somebody to love...♪ ♪ find everything you need to get together this holiday, with low prices and free shipping on millions of items at amazon. hbut mike bloomberg became thele clasguy whoho mdid good. with low prices and free shipping after building a business that created thousands of jobs
he took charge of a city still reeling from 9/11 a three-term mayor who helped bring it back from the ashes bringing jobs and thousands of affordable housing units with it. after witnessing the terrible toll of gun violence... he helped create a movement to protect families across america. and stood up to the coal lobby and this administration to protect this planet from climate change. and now, he's taking on... him. to rebuild a country and restore faith in the dream that defines us. where the wealthy will pay more in taxes and the middle class get their fair share. everyone without health insurance can get it and everyone who likes theirs keep it. and where jobs won't just help you get by, but get ahead. and on all those things mike blomberg intends to make good. jobs creator. leader. problem solver. mike bloomberg for president. i'm mike bloomberg and i approve this message. how did you find great-grandma's recipe?
some things are too important to do yourself. behind e ♪ question get customized security with 24/7 monitoring from xfinity home. awarded the best professionally installed system by cnet. simple. easy. awesome. call, click or visit a store today. four score and seven years ago. >> number one, i'm not stupid, okay. i can tell you that right now. i'm just the opposite. >> our fathers brought forth on this continent a new nation. >> binge, bing, bing, bong, bon >> all men are created equal. >> look at my african american over here. look at him. >> and that government of the people. >> i don't know what i said.
>> by the people. >> go home and get a job. >> for the people. >> i'd like to punch him in the face, i tell ya. >> jimmy kimmel's response to one new poll that showed a majority of republicans believe donald trump is a better president than be a ra babraham joining us now, david rubenstein. he's the author of the new book entitled the american story. conversations with master historians. and, joe, i know you've been really looking forward to this. >> very excited about this. i mean, americans are, david, more separated from their history than ever before. talk about this project, this extraordinary project and why you decided to undertake it. >> well, this is a project under which i began a interviewing great american historians in front of members of congress. we do it once a month. it's been going on for about six
years now and we get 250 to 300 members of congress and their guests every time we do it. americans like to learn about american history because they are making american history. sad situation now is that surveys show that three quarters of americans cannot name the three branches of government. one-third of americans only can name one branch of government. and it turns out that if you were a naturalized citizen candidate, you take a test and 90% of the naturalized citizens take it. the same test was given to all the states and only in one state could they pass it. that's because we don't teach history and civics anymore because of s.t.e.m. s.t.e.m. is important, but so is history and civics. if you don't remember the past, you will relive. and unfortunately we don't remember the past as much as we should. >> i've been reading this at my bedside. it's a gift to have all these
great historians in one vol aum and place. i'm going to start with jon meacham. you said if you had the chance if you were sitting here right now, what would you ask this man who you studied and talked about so much? and he replied why, president about every jefrson, that slavery was the fire bell in the night that would lead to a civil war someday did you not use any political cap nal your 20 years of political dominance to try to ameliorate the situation? john says he gave up on that question. it's a central question to our founding fathers. >> many of our early president were slave owners. on george washington freed his slaves on his death. thomas jefferson said he didn't like slavery but he didn't oppose it. i would write how could you create all men equal when you had two slaves with you and you owned 200 slaves at the same time whabd wand what was your relationship with sally
hemmings? she was a sleeve and also in effect his sister -- or half sister of his wife. interestingly, the father of his wife was also the father of sally hemmings. >> so -- >> so, david. >> yes. >> i'm sorry, i want to get eddie after this. because eddie and i have been talking about if for some time and it's something that he had to grapple with at princeton regarding the legacy of woodrow wilson. but it seems to me that we correctly, correctly talk about the moral failings, the horrific behavior of our fathers as it per daines to slavery and slave owners but we never get around to the other side of the story thomas jefferson was the man of the millennia because he was the first to clearly articulate in a
way a country carried forward the idea that the individual was more important than the monarchy and that the powers came directly from god to men and women instead of going to a monarch first. it's how do you see us sorting through the dilemma where we look with clear eyes towards the moral failures of these men, but in the same time pull from them the wisdom that actually has made this country so different over the past 250 years? >> well, we have made the founding fathers religious figures almost. we sort of i'dalidolize them. on the other hand, they have flaws as everybody has flaws. today you know their pluses an minuses. people back then, the founding fathers had their plussans minuses as well. slavery was the birth defect of
this country. we still live with it and we're not likely to overcome it anytime soon. after it was ended in 1865, we still had the jim crowe laws and the discrimination we still have. thomas jefferson when he wrote the preamble to the declaration of independence wrote the creed for our country. we hold these shoes to be self-evident that all men are created equal. that was the creed we intended to have. we didn't live up to it. we still haven't lived up to it completely. but it's the creed that inspired the revolution and inspired revolutions around the world. >> joe. >> i'm so excited for your book to come out. and you actually quoted james baldwin, i don't remember -- i can't remember the exact quote but it was something to the point of just because we remember our history doesn't mean we have to be captive to it. but you write an entire book about this delicate balancing act, how we have to reveal the lie. we have to face down the lie.
but at the same time, we can look at our history and take from it what we need to move closer to that promise of a more perfect union. >> that quote comes from james baldwin's the fire next time written in 1963 where he's talking about we not only have to learn our history. we have to accept it but we don't have to drown in it. we have to learn how to use it. and some some ways that's a delicate balance. how do we come to terms as the evils that we've done as a country? the evils what one philosopher would say the bodies that -- the bitterness at the bottom of the cup and yet imagine a brighter future for ourselves. how do we do that as a country? how do we do that together? and that requires an honest remembering kong. this is one of t reckoning. this is what i wanted to ask you about the book. you decided to write about great men and cokie roberts piece on the founding mothers is important. what was the decision to focus
on these penalties as personalities in this country? >> we had the civil rights movement and we talked about that in his trilogy. there's no doubt that it's called history because we often focus on men, his, three, as cokie roberts would say, it shouldn't be called history. but we did focus on men in the country with their flaws helped build the country. and it's designed to get people to come to hear this. for example, if i had a session at congress where i was going to talk about a complicated social issue, i'm not sure i would have drawn as many people. i'm trying to get members of congress there, once then get there they're going to learn something about american history. when the members of congress come, they're like children who are young average citizens who say to the authors, i can have my book autographed? can you tell me about this and here's how your book changed my life.
robert carroll wrote four volumes on lyndon johnson. when he spoke, members of congress came with their dog eared copies of the book and they wanted it autographed just like anybody else would. they do care about history even though you might think plus or minus about this generally, they care about history and want to know more about it. >> david, you spoke with our good friend walter isakson about the old man of the revolution, benjamin franklin. we always put them altogether thinking they were all contemporaries, but franklin wabs was so much older than jefferson and so many of the red hots that actually pushed this revolution forward. what did you learn about franklin? >> he was a renaissance man. he was the most famous person in the country. he was more famous than anybody in our country because of his scientific inventions. he was in paris and london many years negotiating agreements. he was very well respected. he was the only person who signed the declaration of independence, the constitution
and the treaty of paris. so he had a big impact, but he was unpopular at times, too. at one time he didn't look to be tough enough against the stamp act and his common-law wife tried to tear down their house. he told his wife to run the business, and that's how he was able to afford what he was doing. he had people working for him, and he was really doing other things. >> steve, you've studied all these fascinating presidents and other great americans. if you could meet with one for two hours, which one would it be? >> there is no doubt in my mind it w the greatest man was abraham lincoln. he decided to hold it together at great sacrifice. we lost 600,000 men and women. to me his eloquence is so amazing. when you think about the gettysburg address, it captures so much about what america is
about. if i could meet someone for one hour or two hours, it would be abraham lincoln. nefs he was in a league by himself. >> and we talked about the fact that even going into the summer of 1864, he didn't think he was going to be reelected. he wasn't sure he was even going to win his own party's nomination. in realtime he was considered a failure by so much of the country, and yet he saved the union and he's remembered today by most, like you, as america's greatest president. >> he might have lived except for one think. john booth tried to kidnap him and that didn't get very far. but when john wilkes booth heard he was going that night, and after he heard him say african-americans may be able to vote, that spurred john wilkes booth to say, we can't let that happen. julia grant didn't like mary todd lincoln, so she said, let's
get out of town. if they had gone to the theater, they would have been around ulysses s. grant and probably john wilkes booth wouldn't have gotten to where he did and things would have changed. >> thank you so much. this is incredible. coming up, president trump said this morning that it might be better to wait until after the 2020 election to make a trade deal with china. that could be bad news for u.s. farmers and american taxpayers. we'll explain that, ahead on "morning joe." in one week...
a lot will happen in your life. wrinkles just won't. neutrogena® rapid wrinkle repair's derm-proven retinol works so fast, it takes only one week to reveal younger looking skin. making wrinkles look so last week. rapid wrinkle repair® pair with retinol oil for 2x the wrinkle fighting power. neutrogena®
i like working. what if my retirement plan is, i don't want to retire? then let's not create a retirement plan, let's create a plan for what's next. i like that. get a plan that's right for you. td ameritrade. get a plan that's right for you. i need all the breaks, that i can get. at liberty butchumal- cut. liberty biberty- cut. we'll dub it. liberty mutual customizes your car insurance so you only pay for what you need. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪
beyond the routine checkups. beyond the not-so-routine cases. comcast business is helping doctors provide care in whole new ways. all working with a new generation of technologies powered by our gig-speed network. because beyond technology... there is human ingenuity. every day, comcast business is helping businesses go beyond the expected. to do the extraordinary. take your business beyond.
said the 95-year-old is feeling better and looks forward to returning home soon. carter has overcome several health challenges in recent months, including a fall last spring requiring him to get a hip replacement. in october he hit his head in another fall and received 14 stitches, but as you can see, he was still able to travel to tennessee to help build a habitat for humanity home shortly after that, like the next day. he's amazing. he fractured his pelvis later that month after another fall. just last week, carter was released from emery hospital in atlanta after recovering from surgery to relieve pressure on his brain caused by bleeding from a fall. so we are praying for him and, really, he still guides us to this day in the way he lives his life. still ahead, the impeachment process moves forward with the president away at the nato summit in london. he's apparently so toxic that his buddy, boris johnson, is avoiding him.
"morning joe" is back in 90 seconds. 90 seconds. (alarm beeping) welcome to our busy world. where we all want more energy. but with less carbon footprint. can we have both? at bp, we're working every day to make energy that's cleaner and better. and we see possibilities everywhere. to make energy that's cleaner and better. at chevy, we're all about bringing families together. this time of year, that's really important. so we're making it easier than ever to become part of our family. man: that's why our chevy employee discount is now available to everyone. the chevy price you pay is what we pay. not a cent more. family is important to us. and we'd like you to be part of ours. so happy holidays. and welcome to the family. the chevy family! get the chevy employee discount for everyone today. (employee) half a millionar sales preowned vehicles,er most with tech features like blind spot detection, back up camera... [kristen gasps]
(employee) because you never know what might be behind you. (kristen bell) does the sloth come standard? (kristen bell vo) looking to buy? enterprise makes it easy. . we aren't here to talk about impeachment or the president of the united states. i have a rule of codels. when we travel abroad, we don't talk about the president in a negative way.
>> i think it's very unpatriotic of the democrats to put on a performance where they do that, i do. i think it's a bad thing for our country. impeachment wasn't supposed to be used that way. all you have to do is read the transcripts. you'll see there was absolutely nothing done wrong. they had legal scholars looking at the transcripts the other day, and they said, these are absolutely perfect. trump is right when he uses the word perfect. those calls that we made, two of them, were absolutely perfect calls. and i think it's a very bad thing for our country. does it cast a cloud? well, if it does, then the democrats have done a very great disservice to the country, which they have. >> wow. there you see the house speaker abiding by the water's edge rule, opting not to talk domestic politics while overseas in spain. the president in london, not so much. good morning. welcome it "morning joe." >> mika, we can't let that go.
the president once again acted like a clown on the international stage. this is the same president who uses the crosses of normandy to attack nancy pelosi, to attack his domestic political rivals. this is the same president who used congressionally approved foreign aid, military aid to a democratic country invaded by vladimir putin. once again to try to impact domestic politics. and you know everybody across the world is snickering when the president says, we had legal scholars looking at these transcripts. not transcripts. they said they're perfect. what were the names of those legal scholars? i would love to know, and i would love to know where these legal scholars who said these calls were absolutely perfect are employed this morning. i don't think they exist. and one of the legal scholars came up to him and said, sir, i really think, sir, that was a perfect call, sir. you know, sir, i used to go to paris, sir. but i don't go to paris.
this guy, again, everybody in the world knows he's lying and he's representing us on the world stage this morning. great job. >> it's painful but also really damaging, and we'll get to why. along with joe, willie and me, we have a professor at princeton university, eddie glaud jr., economic analyst steve ratner. he's come with charts. and president of foreign relations and author of the b k book, richard hoss. it's hard not to think about the impact the president has on the world stage to our national security pretty much every time he opens his mouth. >> and getting in fights with everybody, and after he gets in fights, he decides to push his tariff force, his trade wars even more, which, of course, just taxes working class americans. hey, before we get there, though, you know, i wanted to
talk to willie. willie, you remember -- i think it was three years, i don't remember how long we were in prison in turkey, but remember we desperately, all we wanted was the key to the gel cell inside that cave, right? >> god knows we tried to get it. yeah. >> every way possible. i'm not going to go into the details this morning. this is a family show. but, willie, eddie gloud, he didn't even have to bribe anybody, and he got the key to his hometown. >> aww. >> it is unbelievable in moss point, mississippi. >> moss point. >> you know moss point is such an incredible -- our family spent time there. it's a wonderful place. but how exciting his mother was able to be with him along with mayor king. how exciting. isn't that something?
>> eddie, your mom was on stage with you there. they gave you the key to the city. what was that moment like? >> it was surreal. right now it's surreal. she's watching right now to see your photo on "morning joe." she's probably smiling a bigger smile than that. i love my hometown, i'm a child of moss point, mississippi, and to receive that honor, it's the best thing that i've received up to this point in my life. >> tell us what moss point is like? what kind of town is it? >> it's a town in mississippi where moss hangs from magnolia tree. it's the best place on the planet, and of course it's where the best person in the world lives, and that's my mom. >> she must be so proud. >> ratner has keys to, you know, east side mansions. it's moving, too. just as moving to see him use all the keys that he has. >> moss point sounds pretty good
right now. >> all right. i think i'm going to take over here and we'll head into what's actually going on right now. and general thoughts, big takeaways, the president has been speaking in london. so far, richard hoss, your concerns, your takeaways. >> the president has a unique style going into summits. even before this summit began, introducing new tariffs against france, essentially escalating the trade war with them, also unilaterally introducing new tariffs against two countries in latin america for allegedly devaluing or artificially manipulating their currencies when there is no evidence they were doing that. this is an administration that's essentially sanctions happy and tariffs happy. they love the economic instruments of foreign policy. not so much diplomacy, not so much the use of military force. and i think the largest story in europe is, to use my favorite word, europe or nato in
disarray. the president went after macron this morning. to some extent macron had an unfortunate interview calling the natos brain dead. but there is a real difference in how to handle turkey, how ta -- to handle russia. but what we're seeing, this alliance that was pivotal in the united states and the west through the cold war for four decades, there was no consensus. consensus is always the foundation of an alliance, and the president has, to use the word of the day, a very transactional approach to alliances. rather than thinking about strategic purpose, he constantly has a ledger and asks, are all others paying enough rather than saying, whether we are getting enough out of it, which is something very different. >> isn't there a transitional situation in europe as well? because macron is stepping back. i'm sorry, merkel is stepping
back, ma crcron and trying to reassert himself as the man of europe. >> he is, but france alone can't do it, and france doesn't have an alliance. originally it was going to be germany. merkel said no, thanks. with the brits, essentially, brexit is almost a foregone conclusion given the election on december 12, the liberalism we're seeing in hungary and poland, the crazy government in italy. europe has seen the most difficult moment since the foundations of modern europe after world war ii. >> joe. >> willie, again, it seems every political move donald trump makes on the world stage benefits vladimir putin. here we have him once again going to a nato summit, once again attacking nato allies. once again undermining an alliance that was actually put together for the purposes of
holding russia and russia expansion in check. and on top of that, he started even more trade wars when the tariff taxes that he's imposed on working class americans is really starting to be felt in this economy. we've got a manufacturing recession for the first time in a decade, and every economist says that's because of the tariff wars. he said it was -- that these trade wars were easy. it's proving to be just the opposite, and yet here we are this morning with the president expanding those trade wars even more. >> yeah, and at a time when these alliances are frayed, anyway, as richard said, when europe is shaky on its own, you have the president coming in and shaking it up even more. there is some irony in president trump's criticism, although it may be well founded, that macron is being diseffect tive with na which served him well over the years, including up to
yesterday. carol lee is outside parliament where the president is spending some time today. he'll have tea with prince charles and camilla. there will be a grouping at buckingham palace. what is the president's posture? obviously he has impeachment on his mind as he meets with other leaders of the world. >> reporter: yes, he does. he tweeted as soon as he got here about impeachment. we heard him today. he talked for almost an hour or more and a number of times talked about impeachment. i think the thing that was quite striking was the way that he kind of role reversed on nato a little bit where he was saying, nato is agile and criticized ever since he came into office, even when he was a candidate. and he did just go after manuel macron who he had very sharp words for and said his comments were nasty. there was a lot of irony there, and now he's going to head into
other meetings. the whole time we'll see him meeting with world leaders. he has a press conference tomorrow, and all the while, impeachment is going to be hanging over this. >> carol lee, thank you very much. at this point it's hard not to be incredibly embarrassed watching him speak on the world stage with the french president, who i feel like does his best to try and make it a pallatable conversation. >> there is a context here. the president, after nato, and right after the president did the change of policy in syria, what this was was going back almost 40 to 50 years to degaulle. you have a president saying, we no longer can trust the united states. if the president can do that in the middle east, why can't he do that in europe? he has very different views to putin. what we're seeing in some ways is the old fishers in the western alliance. macron is trying to lead a more independent europe because he believes france can no longer
count on the united states because trump has become much more unreliable, much more unpredictable. that's the backdrop to this, is essentially a drifting apart between the united states and europe where there is simply no trust across the atlantic, and the position of these new tariffs will only add fuel to the fire. still ahead on "morning joe," door dueling reports inside the white house on the president's probe. we'll break down each one and also an expected vote from the intel committee. first let's go to bill with a check on the forecast. bill? >> seven days since it went on shore in california. it's finally exiting the northeast today. we have thousands of schools closed and canceled in areas of new england. central new york was nailed. we had 28 inches of snow an hour outside of albany. albany had 19 inches of snow, their sixth biggest snowstorm ever recorded and their records go all the way back to the 1800s. this wasn't just your average storm. the worst of it is over the
boston area. it's been snowing hard on and off this morning. very difficult morning there. then the snow is spread along the coastline of maine. we're not going to get a lot of additional snow out of this. it looks like maine could get four to eight inches, but in boston another inch or two and we'll slowly stop that one. in the mass pike, they had one or two feet along the road there. i-95 had some slippery spots, but it is improving. where it is still snowing in long island up to portsmouth and heading to ban gogor, that's wh the worst is today. we're seeing improving skies in new york and newark. because of breezy conditions, minor delays possible. in albany where they had the epic 19 inches of snow, it is improving. i think the worst today will be in boston and we'll see improvements as we go through the afternoon.
the big news is we don't have any big, bad storms after this. we'll see things improving across the country and clearing out. 68 sounds gorgeous in dallas today. still cold in minneapolis. get ready in southern california. you have some wet weather and rain heading your way late tonight and into your wednesday, but that storm is not going to cause too much damage. look at the sky in new york city. we're clearing it out for a sunny afternoon. you're watching "morning joe." we'll be right back. ♪
(children playing) (dog barking) ♪ (music building) experience the power of sanctuary at the lincoln wish list sales event. sign and drive off in a new lincoln with zero down, zero due at signing, and a complimentary first month's payment. there are things we would change about work. and there are things we wouldn't. ♪ when work is worth it.
work is worth it. work can be closer to home... pay more... make us proud. careerbuilder. work can work. find your work at careerbuilder.com i have moderate to severe pnow, there's skyrizi. ♪ things are getting clearer, yeah i feel free ♪ ♪ to bare my skin ♪ yeah that's all me. ♪ nothing and me go hand in hand ♪ ♪ nothing on my skin ♪ that's my new plan. ♪ nothing is everything. keep your skin clearer with skyrizi. 3 out of 4 people achieved 90% clearer skin at 4 months. of those, nearly 9 out of 10 sustained it through 1 year. and skyrizi is 4 doses a year, after 2 starter doses. ♪ i see nothing in a different way ♪ ♪ and it's my moment so i just gotta say ♪ ♪ nothing is everything skyrizi may increase your risk of infections and lower your ability to fight them. before treatment your doctor should check you for infections and tuberculosis. tell your doctor if you have an infection
or symptoms such as fevers, sweats, chills, muscle aches or coughs, or if you plan to or recently received a vaccine. ♪ nothing is everything ask your dermatologist about skyrizi. ♪ a lot will happen in your life. wrinkles just won't. neutrogena® rapid wrinkle repair's derm-proven retinol works so fast, it takes only one week to reveal younger looking skin. neutrogena®
beyond the routine checkups. beyond the not-so-routine cases. comcast business is helping doctors provide care in whole new ways. all working with a new generation of technologies powered by our gig-speed network. because beyond technology... there is human ingenuity. every day, comcast business is helping businesses go beyond the expected. to do the extraordinary. take your business beyond. the house intelligence committee is expected to vote on the impeachment report. members of the committee can now review the document, and intel chairman adam schiff says it will also be released to the public at some point today. if the committee votes to adopt
the report, it will be sent to the judiciary committee. at the same time chairman schiff also told msnbc last night that his panel's investigation of the president doesn't stop after tonight's vote. >> that's not the end of our investigation, so even while judiciary does its work, we will continue investigating, we're continuing to issue subpoenas, we're continuing to learn new information. that work goes on. >> meanwhile, house republicans are hitting back with their own minority report, arguing that democrats have failed to establish that president trump committed any impeachable offenses. a copy of the 123-page report says this. despite their best efforts, the evidence gathered during the democrats' partisan and one-sided impeachment inquiry does not support that president trump pressured ukraine to investigate his political rival to benefit the president in the 2020 presidential election.
the evidence does not establish any impeachable offense. house intel chairman adam schiff hit back at the gop report writing in part, tellingly, the minority dismisses this as just part of the president's outside the beltway thinking. it is more accurately outside the law and constitution, and a violation of his oath of office. and, joe, i just -- i'm trying to envision that picture of the republicans putting together, house republicans putting together that report. you would have to literally put on blinders to write it that way. >> you actually would just have to go into it going, this guy is guilty as hell. he's as guilty as hell. we can't argue the facts because the facts aren't on our side. we can't argue the law because the law is not on our side, we just have to argue. that's all they've been doing. they've been making fools of themselves over the weekend.
they have been adopting, as we said, vladimir putin's talking points, talking points that the intelligence community warned them was part of a russian propaganda effort, but they were so desperate to defend the president of the united states instead of the united states of america itself that they actually pushed these talking points. which i think, willie, it begs the question at this point in the proceedings, the democratic party and nancy pelosi, and i certainly understood this, they wanted to narrow the focus to ukraine. they wanted to do that to keep it simple. the president clearly violated his oath of office in what he did. it was easily proven. it's been proven over the past several weeks. he committed bribery. he bribed a foreign leader, said, listen, i will actually give you $400 million in military aid but you have to give me dirt on my political
opponent. he got caught red-handed. the republicans aren't doing anything about that. so the question is this. if they're going to act in such bad faith that they're now assets of russia using, again, vladimir putin's propaganda that the intel communities, all 17 intel agencies, why not expand this impeachment inquiry? why not bring up the illegal payoff to stormy daniels a week or so before the election that has a man sitting in jail who helped orchestrate that illegal payoff? because that illegal payoff would have landed any senator, would have landed any member of congress, would have landed any candidate for any federal office in a federal penitentiary. so why don't they expand it to those illegal acts? to the ten acts in the mueller report that very clearly laid
out obstruction of justice. why not show the american people the full breadth and the fullscope of donald trump's corruption, especially coming on the heels of an attorney general trying to run roughshod over an inspector general's upcoming report, an attorney general who has lied to congress already, committed -- i mean, there is nothing but lawlessness in this administration. shouldn't the united states congress go on record and really show the american people the full width of this corrupt, corrosive administration? >> well, the democrats in the house, the plan had been to get a vote before the end of the year. that's going to be tough now already based on the schedule that they've laid out, judiciary bringing in some more witnesses, and nadler starting his chapter in the story. so maybe they do start to open
it up at this point, because that 123-page document put out by republicans now enshrines and confirms what we've heard from them all along, which is they're going to look the other way come hell or high water. the idea that you can sit and listen to those two weeks of testimony from nonpartisan officials, many of them whom work in the trump administration, many of whom were appointed by the trump administration and think that nothing went wrong here, there was nothing to see here, that they concede no points that he did nothing wrong? that's just willful. you have a group of people sitting and listening to that testimony obviously with their minds made up. we knew when we heard devin nunes' opening statements that their minds were made up. senators speaking publicly, senator john kennedy saying, no, it was ukraine that meddled.
despite all the evidence from the intel agencies, despite the warning from congress in that room that it was irresponsible to chase that conspiracy theory, the idea, joe, that republicans could have sat in that room or watched on television if they weren't on the committee for those two weeks and listened to those witnesses and conclude in 123 pages that there was nothing to see here is preposterous and it tells us what we probably knew all along which is they were never going to vote for impeachment in the first place. >> right. and they're takeaway, mika, is this. their takeaway afr tter two wee of damning testimony is, one, the only way they defend the president is first, again, using propaganda from russia that 17 intel agencies have struck down, and that the intel community actually warned them not to use. said that vladimir putin had been using it for two years. that's one of their defenses. their second defense is saying -- is pointing to polls
that show a majority of americans want donald j. trump impeached and removed from office. 50% of americans want him impeached and removed from office. bill clinton, at the height of impeachment in the late '90s, only 29% wanted him removed. so republicans have no legs to stand on legally or factually, and if they're going to show such bad faith, they're actually letting vladimir putin send them their talking points, i think democrats need to expand this. they need to bring in all of the high crimes and all of the misdemeanors that this president has committed and lay it bare not only for the american people now, but for history, for future generations to look back and see that at least one branch of this government was willing to be held accountable, stand up and be counted to speak truth to the
president of the united states, his corrupt attorney general and a political party that's now taking marching orders in their talking points from vladimir putin. >> absolutely. coming up on "morning joe" -- >> play the radio. make sure the televisions -- excuse me -- make sure you have the record player on at night. make sure the kids hear words. >> joe biden seemed to date himself a little bit with that line from the democrats' debate. now he's rolling out his no malarkey bus tour. that groovy idea is next on "morning joe." is next on "morning joe." ♪ - [woman] with my shark, i deep clean messes like this,
this, and even this. but i don't have to clean this, because the self-cleaning brush roll removes hair while i clean. - [announcer] shark, the vacuum that deep cleans now cleans itself. make family-sized meals fast, and because it's a ninja foodi, it can do things no other oven can, like flip away. the ninja foodi air fry oven, the oven that crisps and flips away.
♪for the holidays you can't beat home sweet home.♪♪ we go the extra mile to bring your holidays home. wean air force veteran made of doing what's right,. not what's easy. so when a hailstorm hit, usaa reached out before he could even inspect the damage. that's how you do it right. usaa insurance is made just the way martin's family needs it - with hassle-free claims, he got paid before his neighbor even got started. because doing right by our members, that's what's right. usaa. what you're made of, we're made for. usaa
comcast business is helping doctors provide care in whole new ways. all working with a new generation of technologies powered by our gig-speed network. because beyond technology... there is human ingenuity. every day, comcast business is helping businesses go beyond the expected. to do the extraordinary. take your business beyond. welcome back to "morning joe." i have a question for you, joe. former vice president biden claims he doesn't need former president obama's endorsement. my question is, on a bus tour in
iowa yesterday, biden said obama's endorsement is not needed. backing up a little, n no malarkey. does that work? what is malarkey? >> i think it's another word for b.s. he's irish, so he says no malarkey. >> i think actually it is a fantastic campaign slogan for cork in like 1956. >> he's just -- he's owning it, then. it's just like, that's what he's been saying. >> i'm a '50s guy. i go around saying things that dudes in their mid-80s say. >> i kind of like it. >> listen, i'm a big believer in being true to yourself. if that makes him more comfortable on the campaign trail, so be it, jedi.
which, of course, if i ever run a campaign, that's what i'm going to have on the side of my bus. so be it, jedi. that's what i say to my kids every time they talk back to me. >> now we get to a "politico" report that obama said. biden said, he may have said that, and if it's true, and he said it, there's truth to it. biden told bloomberg they were sent to key states such as pennsylvania and colorado to energize voters. biden also dished about his fellow 2020 democratic opponents, scoffing at the notion that senator elizabeth warren is building enthusiasm and accusing mayor pete buttigieg of stealing his health care plan.
applebee's new sizzlin' entrées. now starting at $9.99. the best of pressure cooking and air frying now in one pot, and with tendercrisp technology, you can cook foods that are crispy on the outside and juicy on the inside. the ninja foodi pressure cooker, the pressure cooker that crisps. liberty mutual customizes your car insurance, so you only pay for what you need. i wish i could shake your hand. granted.
only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ aveeno® with prebiotic striple oat complex balances skin's microbiome. so skin looks like this and you feel like this. aveeno® skin relief. get skin healthy™ every year, our analysts visit thousands of companies, in a multitude of countries, where we get to know the people that drive a company's growth
our past presidents for that in their leadership. it shouldn't have happened. i want to deal with china and that's if i want to make it. not if they want to make it, but if i want to make it. i'd like to wait until after the election to make a deal. it's got to be right. >> that was president trump this morning at the nato summit in london. we're still sorting through some of those comments. >> did he say steal the cookie cutter? so you're making cookies and somebody steals the cookie cutter? >> no gingerbread men for you. >> a research fellow at the hoover institution, lon he chen. we can take the cookie cutter comment if you want or passover -- pass over it, if you want. the president is very concerned about tariffs on french wine that the president is proposing
but let's take china first. where are we in this trade war and is it working like the president says it is? >> here's the challenge. i think the president would very much like to see a deal before the election because it's something he campaigned on. this is one of those political situations where it would actually benefit both the chinese as well as us to get the deal done. i was just in china for a week actually last week. they're economy is suffering, there's no question about it. but we've got big problems here as well because of this trade war. it would benefit the united states to get this deal done. so when the president says, china wants a new deal, i don't mind waiting, the reality, i think, is actually different. i think clearly this would be a situation where the sooner the deal gets done, the better. you remove that uncertainty, i think you'll see economic benefit. >> so lanhee, let's talk about that for a second. i'm so glad you brought up china and china's economy actually being hurt by this. so donald trump and his supporters can actually bring up china, and they can also bring
up iran. and they can say, the president has taken a tough stand on both countries, and you have both economies hurting right now. i mean, we haven't even talked about iran today. they are now undergoing the worst turmoil, the biggest protests, the most violent protests since 1979 when the shah was kicked out of power. talk about donald trump's tough stand on both of those countries and the impact that it's having. >> well, certainly with respect to china, i think everyone across the political spectrum agreed that our approach in the prior years wasn't really working. they were stealing intellectual property, they were basically taking advantage of american business. the question was, do you come in with a sledgehammer or do you come in with a scalpel? obviously president trump came in with a sledgehammer and that approach has led to an escalation of tension to the point where i do think now there
is some serious economic drag because of what's going on with china. also the other issue is, what is the long-run relationship going to be like between washington ask chin and china? you're talking about two powers that will be on the world stage for a while. so what does that look like now that we've had this period of tension? iran is a situation where i do think the president's full and maximum campaign has been effective certainly in bringing economic harm to the iranians. the question is what's next? what's the next part of the strategy? it's one thing to say we don't like the iran nuclear deal, we want to get out, what comes next? i think that's always been the big question with this administration. what is the strategic overlay of foreign policy going forward? >> that could apply to both countries as well, because if you are not a donald trump supporter, you can certainly look at what he's done with china and talk about how reckless it is, talk about what he's done with iran and say,
yes, he's got a gut reaction to what the iran policy has been in the past. but again, because he's a day trader, because he doesn't plan strategically more than a tweet or a day or a week ahead of time, there really is no overall strategy regarding iran or with china, and as you said, america and china are going to -- we're going to have a bipolar world again over the next 50 years, and america and china are going to determine the direction of this world and its economy for a long time to come. you're exact ly right. we can't decouple. >> so don chu is hanging out before the bell, but why don't i weigh in on this. don? >> it's interesting, because i've been listening to this
conversation, and lanhee chen talked about the idea of a scalpel or a sledgehammer. we're looking at it as how big is the piggy bank or how big is the war chest? what i mean by that, we have a stock market that sold off more yesterday, more than some time now in these new trade worries. but this is also a president, and president trump who has, in the past, made no secret with the idea that he believes with the strength frof the u.s. econy and stocks at record highs right now that he has the ability to be able to weather this storm out. if the market continues to hover like this, not crazy down, not crazy up but just give a record high level, he might feel, president trump might feel like he has the latitude or the ability to be able to kind of hold out on this trade war, and if the stock market stays this way even through the election cycle next year, this may be something where he feels like he can maybe drag his feet a little
bit and try to get the deal he wants. so that's going to be the reason the market takes it the way it is despite the fact we just took another leg lower today in the futures market on the heels of those comments on trade. >> but, dom, i think we have to believe that the number of cards left to be played in this economic cycle we're in now is growing very thin. in other words, if the president really believes that he can continue to delay this trade deal with china and not have a market effect on the economy before we get to august and september and october when voters are making decisions about november, you know, i think he might be proven wrong on that. and i think that's the big challenge here, which is you can s say, yes, times are relatively good now, the markets are still doing relatively well. i think a lot of people who are market participants have priced in the notion that we'll have some kind of agreement with china between now and the election. but if we don't, i think that does create some serious potential damage not just for the market but also for where
the u.s. economy is headed because the reality is the labor market is strong, there are a lot of things that are strong. the number of tools the federal reserve has left are relatively limited. i think not getting to a deal with china would pose a serious problem economically for the president, but generally for the u.s. economic situation. >> so lanhee, let me ask you this question. the market is doing well, but let's think about the farmers in wisconsin and the like, right? the trade war and the bailout, who has benefited from this? we can talk about the market being strong, but what's happening to farmers out there on the ground? >> here's the problem with something like a bailout. it's a band-aid for what's happening now. but there is no long-term thinking about how are we going to open markets around the world for our farmers? yes, it's great that you're helping them at this point in time. but there's still no telling what's going to happen with argentina, with france, with all these different markets. we still don't have the usmca which is the successor agreement to nafta done and out the door.
there are a lot of things that need to happen for our farmers and ranchers to have a sustainable economic platform going forward. and what i fear is that by doing these one-off things, one-off trade deal with this country, one-off tariffs with this country, failing to consider the impact of bailouts' long run, we're not actually formulating a good long-term strategy for farmers and markets to be successful around the world. >> while we're at it, let's do business for the bell, dom. what are you looking at? >> one quick comment there to lanhee and what you were saying there. john deere is saying next year they're already seeing farmers pull back on their planned purchases because of that trade deal uncertainty. there is certainly evidence of that kind of sentiment changing, especially for farmers in the heartland of america. one place that is strong, though, mika, joe, gang, everywhere, is the american consumer. it's going to be a record cyber monday. the numbers are still being tallied, but it's expected to be about $9.2 billion.
that's how much americans spent on online shopping according to adobe analytics. that's 7% more than they spent last year at this time, and just to give you an idea of how much those virtual ringers were ringing, they estimate they spent about $1100 a minute, so they at least continue to feel confident there. one of the reasons why those people may have been fast and furious with the shopping because better to get those deals now and figure out later on if you actually want to keep the stuff. it turns out most americans will be returning gifts this holiday season more than three-quarters of planned gifrts this season, and more than one in five of us will return half the gifts they get this time around. that's a survey put out by oracle. it marks a shift where consumers feel more comfortable and less stigma about returning items they don't like.
>> i just wanted to ask, what is the concern for retailers? because i just know in our household, i'm sure in your household and so many others, even the last two or three years, there has been such a transition away from traditional storefront shopping and just going on amazon or just going on websites and purchasing, especially my children and younger people. even us. that's how we shop these days. we used to always go out to the malls. we used to go to storefronts. it's just not happening anymore. how concerned are retailers this season that, let's say a record-breaking cyber monday leads to bad news for storefront retailers. >> that's the key right now, right? this is very much going to be a haves and have-nots retail season, as it is pretty much every retail season. the reason i say that is because you have retailers doing really
well according to their omni channel sales. they're online, bricks and mortars, other ways they can sell to you. walmart is one of them, target is one of them. amazon is only online these days. but retailers who have been able to put their presences online have been doing very well this time around. it's about combining those things together. joe, to your point, i went out and did cyber shopping on black friday and cyber monday as well, but i also went to the malls near me this past weekend, and i got to tell you, the traffic was pretty light. i don't know whether or not this bodes well for the overall bricks and mortars thing. i'll leave this with you guys. $3 billion of cyber monday alone on their smart phones. >> that's all i saw my daughter's doing.
thank you very much. thank you to our guests, great to have you on. we mentioned cyberer monday, now today is giving tuesday. a look at one company that is giving back. one pair of socks at a time. keep it here on "morning joe." " this piece is talking to me. yeah? so what do you see? i see an unbelievable opportunity. i see best-in-class platforms and education. i see award-winning service, and a trade desk full of experts, available to answer your toughest questions. and i see it with zero commissions on online trades. i like what you're seeing. it's beautiful, isn't it? yeah. td ameritrade now offers zero commissions on online trades. ♪ i need all the breaks, that i can get.
at liberty butchumal- cut. liberty biberty- cut. we'll dub it. liberty mutual customizes your car insurance so you only pay for what you need. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ the holidays are easier... when you can do this.. post this... and be there like this. so we give you that. and right now, buy a samsung galaxy s10 or note 10... and get one free. he borrowed billions donald trump failed as a businessman. and left a trail of bankruptcy and broken promises. he hasn't changed. i started a tiny investment business, and over 27 years, grew it successfully to 36 billion dollars. i'm tom steyer and i approve this message.
i'm running for president because unlike other candidates, i can go head to head with donald trump on the economy, and expose him fo what he is: a fraud and a failure. make family-sized meals fast, and because it's a ninja foodi, it can do things no other oven can, like flip away. the ninja foodi air fry oven, the oven that crisps and flips away.
♪needs somebody ♪everybody needs somebody to love♪ ♪someone to love ♪someone to love ♪i got a little message for you...♪ ♪when you have that somebody, hold on to them,♪ ♪give them all your love.... wherever they are♪ ♪i need you, you, you ♪i need you, you, you ♪i need you, you, you ♪i need you, you, you ♪ there are things we would change about work. and there are things we wouldn't. ♪ when work is worth it. work is worth it. work can be closer to home... pay more... make us proud. careerbuilder. work can work. find your work at careerbuilder.com
created in 2012 with a simple idea of encouraging people to do good. since then, it is a movement that inspires hundreds of millions to give, collaborate, and celebrate generosity. one company, for every par of socks purchased, they give a pair of socks to someone in need. they have given away over 25 million pairs of socks. fellas, good morning, good to see you. the voices, i know them from the
commercial. let's talk about your company first of all, but also just more broadly this one for one idea. a lot of companies are doing that now and the obligation that you guys feel and a lot of companies feel now to be more than just about making money. >> it is interesting i don't see it as an obligation, but more of an opportunity to give back in the place where we all work and live, and it's it is the reason we gave back to our community. >> the shocks were an after thought. we found out that socks are the most requested item in shelters. and it jumped into the train of thought, it made sense to do a pair purchased and a pair donated, and i wanted to make
the best socks. sometimes it feels complicated, but it can be something as choosing socks that people need every day. >> so help me understand how this model is different from other businesses, right? one pair of socks, one donation, talk about how this is how you dive renuate. >> when we saw this quote on facebook, we wanted to find a way to solve it, you know, let's carry socks around in our backpacks and bags, and we realized that was not scaleable, right? it was to allowing to sell and allow to donate, and we can really ratchet this thing up. we just launched new apparel, and we're about to donate other
ite items. >> there is other company that's have this idea, i remember interviewing the warby parker guys, you're giving away half of your product effectively, how does that work. >> if you think about it from the then you can't really remove it. i think as an investor you are giving away so much product, how can you afford that? we're smart and focused on that one idea. so it is scale able from the beginning and it is a great marketing idea, right? they are having impact through their purchase which is something that i think everybody wants in today's world. >> do you find there is an expectation from consumers, they
want to associate with a brand that is doing well in the in world. >> i think over the years, us and other businesses that come along the way, i think responsibility in some form or fashion is becoming the expectation, so whether or not it is giving back to a local charity or finding a way to reduce plastic in your supply chain, there is something they're looking for that goes move and beyond creating and selling a product. >> you want it to be something, is it easier to get investors on board? because for some reason, you want to be associated with a company like that, not just a profit making company, but something that gives back, right? >> we met with a lot of places
that turned us down. some of which didn't think they would care, and now you proof of concept. people are going to look and say it is worth it, right? it is a good sock, too. for information on how you can contribute to giving tuesday, visit our website. it is giving tuesday, and there is a lot happening this morning. right now at this very minute, president trump supposed to be sitting down with the president of france, emanuel macron and tensions seem to be