tv Deadline White House MSNBC October 26, 2022 1:00pm-3:00pm PDT
hi there, everyone. it's 4:00 in new york. new developments in what is one of the biggest stumbling blocks for every one of the criminal investigations into the twice impeached disgraced ex-president and his campaign to overturn the 2020 presidential election that he lost. we are talking about all the ways in which ex-trump officials and aides and allies are trying to prevent investigators from getting the answers to some of the biggest questions around the capitol insurrection and donald trump's potential criminal cullibilities. "the new york times" reports the justice department has asked a judge to force the two trump lawyers to provide additional grand jury testimony as prosecutors seek to break through the former president's attempts to shield his efforts to overturn the 2020 election
from the investigation. that is according to two people familiar with the matter. prosecutors filed a motion to compel testimony from the two lawyers, pat cipollone and patrick philbin last week and told beryl howell in washington who oversees grand jury matters that the evidenced should overcome trump's claims that information is prevented by attorney client privilege. the executive committee came up against that wall of attorney client and executive privilege over and over again in their deposition of cipollone. that meant that critical questions were left unanswered or at best answered only implicitly. watch. >> what about the president? did he indicate whether or not the president needed to be down protect the vice president? >> that question --
>> i'm being instructed. >> i -- i can't think of anybody, you know, on that day who didn't want people to get out of the capitol once that, you know, once the violence started, no. i mean, --. >> what about the president? >> yeah. >> she said the staff. >> i said in the white house. >> oh, i'm sorry. i apologize. i thought you said who else on the staff. [ no audio ] >> i think, you know -- yeah.
>> yeah. yeah, not him. the justice department is hoping to get behind that to get a judge to force cipollone and his deputy pat philbin to provide them wait fuller, truer accounting of trump's conduct before, doing and after the deadly capitol insurrection than what the committee has been able to skillfully without not great effort to obtain. they may have the courts on their side. judge howell has ruled in favor of the government in a similar privilege dispute concerning testimony from two top aides to former vice president mike pence. mark short and greg jacob. short and jacob return to the grand jury this month and answer questions trump's lawyers sought to block as being privileged during their original appearances and breaking this morning a federal judge ruled former white house chief of staff mark meadows involved in
practically every step and aspect of the trump coup plot must testify in the investigation by d.a. fani willis, look into team trump's efforts to overturn joe biden's victory in georgia. quote, south carolina circuit court judge miller ruled meadows must comply with a subpoena as his testimony is material and necessary to the investigation, and that state of georgia is assuring not to cause undue hardship to him. aides and officials dropping like flies in sitting out the investigations. where we begin with our favorite reporters and friend, "washington post" reporter and contributor carolynic will join us, mary mccord former top official in the justice department division. harry lipman, former u.s. attorney, deputy attorney general as well as the host of the talking feds podcast, i start with you, this news, that
cipollone and philbin may go farther than they did with what we saw as a public in the january 6th select committee's questioning of them. >> yeah. farther really all the way to the absolute sort of holly grail. cipollone and philbin repeatedly told trump what he was planning was unlawful. what did he say when you told him that and the response to date has been, i can't talk because of executive privilege. but that executive privilege claim is dubious, and the holding that judge howell made about the vice president's staff indicates it. it might be different for the president, but the argument from the department of justice is, first, biden has waived and that would normally suffice but there is one kavanaugh opinion that suggests maybe that's not enough, but two, and this is basically what south carolina court said about meadows in
georgia, they need the evidence and this is what happened in the richard nixon case. if you need the evidence, executive privilege yields. they are really close in a sort of movement on two sides to getting the most important evidence that has been withheld to date, namely just what trump said when he was told things were unlawful or what he said about pence, everything he said on january 6th, that would be the most vivid testimony of intent to date. >> mary mccord, i asked members of the select committee if after cipollone's deposition if there was any single question for which he invoked his fifth amendment protection and they said no. the only things he didn't answer were the things for which he exerted executive privilege. if harry is saying they go all the way, that sounds like the justice department will be able to get answers to those two questions we showed, did trump do anything to protect the vice president once he knew he was in
danger? and did donald trump want people to leave the capitol? those two things are at the beating bleeding heart of the crimes that took place that day? >> yeah. i agree with harry's analysis basically, the executive privilege, there is some case support for a former president being able to still assert executive privilege, but it is not absolute. it is always a balancing test, and particularly when it's a criminal investigation as harry mentioned, the case of the united states versus nixon, is clear when there's a demonstrably critical need for it in that investigation the executive privilege must yield. so i think what they're seeing here is the department of justice saying we're not going to take no for an answer the way the house select committee was left to in their situation. we're going to go ahead and litigate this and that's what they're doing. they're using their ability to go appeal a grand jury matter to
the chief judge of the district court and get a ruling there. >> even more recent than the nixon example, don mcgahn spent i think close to 30 hours answering questions and certainly getting well beyond the veil of attorney-client privilege for robert mueller. is that a more apt comparison to a top white house lawyer testifying against a president? >> no. because attorney-client privilege doesn't apply when the attorney works for the united states. that is really off the table. trump has just once again tried to proffer it in the mar-a-lago case with the special master down there, but it is a stone cold loser. really his last offense that i think is really in peril now before judge howell is executive privilege. >> i want to bring in carolyn again and show, again, with less investigative tools at their disposal, this is some of what the select committee got from
mr. cipollone. >> i assume, pat, that you would agree the president is obligated to abide by the ruling of the courts? >> of course. >> i assume you also would agree the president has a particular obligation to take care that the laws be faithfully executed? >> that is one of the president's obligations, correct. my view is the vice president had -- didn't have the legal authority to do anything except what he did. i think i was pretty clear there needed to be an immediate and forceful response statement, public statement, that people need to leave the capitol. >> did you continue throughout the period of time up until 4:17, to continue to push for a stronger statement? >> yes. after that, some people were resigning over january 6th. we know who they were.
did i consider it? >> yes. did i do it? no. concerned about if people in the counsel's office left who would replace me. >> so, carole, right behind and really not even veiled at all, is this fear of the counsel's office walking out. you hear it in the texts from sean hannity to mark meadows, if this, then that, and that is the entire counsel office walks out. we know from donald trump installing jeffrey clark long enough for him to show up as the acting attorney general and white house call logs we have seen that overthrowing the attorneys was central to the coup plot on paper. we know trump is tied to all of it. the violence. we know the coup plot on paper was what trump was trying to do with jeffrey clark and the entire white house counsel's office walking out was one of the last sort of strained guardrails on our executive branch of the government.
how important is the testimony of pat cipollone and his deputy patrick philbin? >> you framed that just right, and it makes me think so much about some of the interviews that we did in 2020 in which we learned that, forgive me, in early 2021, where we learned that, you know, mitch mcmcconnell was worried that pat cipollone was going to resign and then where would they be without at least, as you say, that strained guardrail. where would the country be headed. even after the insurrection was not successful in changing the results of a presidential election, still mcconnell himself was calling to worry about this fact. i agree that that moment is one of the most important, both before the insurrection and after it, whether or not the white house counsel's office
walked out on mass was a huge deal. the other thing important about pat cipollone's testimony and you notice it in the replay of those tapes, he does everything to avoid saying what he told the president and what the president told him. that's a hard line pat cipollone has walked in his view of the privilege he owes the office and president. but just imagine what he has said to the president. we already know what he said to mark meadows, which is, this is crazy, mark. the president has to do something right away. he has to go out and tell people to leave the capitol before someone is killed or else those deaths will be on your head, and by association on the president's head. so you can imagine that his testimony goes right to the heart of donald trump's state of mind. donald trump's wishes, even in the face of a good lawyer
telling him that what he was proposing was crazy and/or illegal, and it goes to the state of mind of the president when he rejects that advice. >> yeah. i mean, mary, to carole's smart points here, it goes to all of the times that trump was aware of the illegality of the different elements of the coup plot. it goes to, did you tell him that the eastman memo was illegal? we know that cipollone did. did you tell him that, you know, making that movement, which we know was planned as an otr movement why cassidy hutchinson at time's belabored testimony about a otr and scheduled movement was included in her public testimony, pat cipollone would have been the one warning about that movement. did you connect a stronger statement to perhaps lessening the violence? of course he did. what does he unlock in terms of tying trump's intent to all the
criminal activity that took place that day? >> it seems like throughout all the critical time period, not just january 6th, but the days and even months leading up to it, pat cipollone was a key figure in meetings with the president, right, privy to the fraudulent elect tore scheme, john eastman scheme, privy to the president's reactions to the pushback against ideas like taking over the justice department and installing jeffry clark as the attorney general. like he had a front row seat to all of this. he and mark meadows i would say probably more than just about anybody. so we saw him repeatedly during the house select committee testimony as you just said, nicolle, draw that line between talking sort of generally about what was happening and revealing their specific communications. that's because the executive privilege really is a big communications privilege, right. it's meant to protect the president and his closest aides so that they can have candid
conversations without worrying about them later coming out in public. but again, that's got to yield sometimes to demonstrated need and particularly when you're talking about something as serious as, you know, an actual plot to prevent the peaceful transition of power, it's kind of hard to imagine anything that would be more serious and could overcome that privilege. i think that, you know, if judge howell does, of course, rule against the assertion of executive privilege, that pat cipollone has been asserting so far, there's a potential for there to be really very, very significant evidence that would then be available to the department of justice. >> and if you look at the most senior witnesses, harry, it is jacob and cipollone and philbin that we know about. there could be things we don't know about. it gets you pretty close to his intentional endangerment of mike
pence's life as well. do you think that's among one of the significant lines of questioning? >> 100%. he doesn't want to do anything about the danger to pence. i think it probably gets you there. if you need the 2 inch putt, mark meadows, it's the same rationale. now we think cipollone and philbin will testify truthly and not take the fifth. if meadows is required to pierce the executive privilege he may take the fifth and the department of justice will have a question of to give him immunity or prosecute him. he is the absolute epicenter of trump's guilty intent. but cipollone and philbin get very, very close. >> you're all waiving the red flag in front of me so i'm going to charge through it. mark meadows is in the news again today. similar threat. he's expected to appeal this but he has been delivered a blow, a legal blow. he has been now forced to
testify in the criminal investigation in georgia. he is the ringleader, along with donald trump, of the effort to fraudulently find 11780 votes. here is meadows on the now infamous call with then secretary or current secretary of state brad raffensperger. >> mr. secretary, obviously, there are allegations where we believe that not every vote or fair vote and legal vote was counted, and that's at odds with the representation from the secretary of state's office. what i'm hopeful is, is there some way that we can find some kind of an agreement to look at this a little bit more fully? you know, the president mentioned fulton county.
but in some of these areas where there seems to be a difference of where the facts seem to lead, and so mr. secretary, i was hopeful that, you know, in the spirit of cooperation and compromise, is there something that we can at least have a discussion to look at some of these allegations to find a path forward that's litigious is? >> he knows that's bs when he says that. bill barr has left already because bill barr looked into all of the b.s. claims about fraud in georgia and determined that they were just that, b.s. everything that was alleged in georgia had inappropriately, but not illegally, investigated by doj and found to be lacking in facts. there was no fraud in georgia. meadows, who has also a cabinet level post as white house chief of staff, fellow cabinet member
bill barr has disproven everything he says to raffensperger on the call. how much trouble could mark meadows be in? >> i think mark meadows can be in a lot of -- how would a prosecutor say it or -- there could be a lot of leverage used against him because mark meadows has essentially said in that call, a very polite and not as coarse version of what trump said to raffensperger later, can you find me the x number thousands of votes, come on brad, and it's also a noncrass, noncoarse, potentially defensible version of what donald trump said to his deputy attorney general. just say that it's fraudulent down in georgia. we'll take care of the rest. just say that there's corruption, that there's gambling in the casinos so to
speak. the goal here, there's a boiler plate playbook here. the goal is to stall, to cast doubt, and shade, and meadows is helping do that, even though he's been informed of the truth. i think that his call is not as problematic as what donald trump said, however, and that will be tricky for the department of justice. i'm curious to hear what they will say about that because i think he is more reasonable sounding and you can hear all the um, maybe, all the caveats, he's not, to my ear, doing more than a mission, a fool's errand, for donald trump to try to cast doubt on that election. >> mary, here's what d.a. fani willis would like to talk to meadows about from that petition. quote, the witness possesses
unique knowledge concerning the logistics, planning, and subject matter of the meeting at the white house on december 21st, 2020. the witness possesses unique knowledge concerning the logistics, planning and execution of his visit to the cobb county civic center on december 22nd, 2020. the witness possesses unique knowledge of his e-mails to the united states department of justice officials. this witness, mark meadows, possesses unique knowledge concerning the logistics, planning, excuse and subject matter of the january 2nd 2021 phone call with georgia secretary of state raffensperger. what does fani willis want from mark meadows? >> i think that, you know, to carole's question about his exposure and to what fani willis is clearly looking at, it's not really just that call, right. she's wanting to know everything
that took place in the lead up to that call that mark meadows has knowledge of, that would have led to that pressure on the secretary of state to find, magically find 11,000 votes, and, so i do think there is exposure for mark meadows that may be beyond just what we hear on that call and, you know, there is a -- i think what she's looking at, among the various different election crimes that are potentially available in -- under georgia state law, which is the law she would be applying, you know, there's a potential there for a conspiracy and there's a potential that some of this evidence would lead to that. now that, of course, would mean that there was -- is a decent likelihood, if that's true, that mark meadows will assert the fifth amendment and then we have the same issue there of a prosecutor in georgia having to face issues like, do i offer immunity or do i rely on other evidence i can get elsewhere
because i don't want to relinquish the opportunity to potentially prosecute mark meadows. i will note that fifth amendment is pretty unyielding. it's not the same as executive privilege, but that sometimes it is asserted when there really is no likelihood of prosecution. i'm not suggesting that would be the case here. sometimes that can be probed on kind of a question by question issue about really whether the answer to a particular question really is likely to expose you to criminal, you know, culpability. so there's some wiggle room there to be litigated. the other thing to keep in mind here is that, you know, the department of justice is also interested in mark meadows and so i'm sure that they are probably trying to work with and coordinate with the georgia prosecutor on any decisions about immunity because if she were to convey immunity and he were to testify that would limit the department of justice's
ability to use those statements given under immunity in any kind of prosecution they might bring. >> mary, what circumstance would doj offer immunity to mark meadows? would it have to involve donald trump as the target? >> i think it almost certainly would because otherwise i don't know that it would be worthwhile to them. i think they will be loathed to do that because he seems to be sort of into this up to his eyeballs. >> yeah. >> and i think if they can, again, i'm not predetermining whether they're going to bring charges against donald trump. i still think that's a very difficult question, even if all the evidence is there and not everyone agrees on, that, but it's a tough call for the attorney general because of the precedent it establishes and the other ramifications, but i do think that, you know, if they could find evidence sufficient from other sources without having to convey immunity on mark meadows that would be preferable by far. >> carole, thank you for starting us off.
mary and harry are sticking around. when we come back, our next guest recently sat down with the attorney general of the united states and believes merrick garland will uphold the rule of law. frank joins our conversation next. a warning around the country hon extremist groups are going local with election intimidation strategy of harassing pole workers and ballot boxes. top republicans running for office planning out loud that politicians should have a role in women's decision when it comes to their reproductive health. that and more when "deadline white house" continues after a quick break. a quick break. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪
♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ have diabetes? know where your glucose is? with the freestyle libre 3 system, know your glucose and where it's heading. no fingersticks needed. now the world's smallest, thinnest sensor sends your glucose levels directly to your smartphone. manage your diabetes with more confidence and lower your a1c now you know freestyle libre 3. try it for free at freestylelibre.us. president biden has now signed the inflation reduction act into law. ok, so what exactly does it mean for you? out of pocket costs for drugs will be capped. for seniors, insulin will be just $35. families will save $2,400 on health care premiums. energy costs, down an average of $1,800 a year for families.
♪ well, the stock is bubbling in the pot ♪ ♪ just till they taste what we've got ♪ [ tires squeal, crash ] when owning a small business gets real, progressive gets you right back to living the dream. now, where were we? [ cheering ] breakthrough heartburn... means your heartburn treatment is broken. try zegerid otc. it contains the leading medicine to treat frequent heartburn, uniquely designed for absorption. get all day, all night relief with zegerid otc. ♪ ♪ uniquely designed for absorption. no more waiting. no more running. [ screaming ] we finish this tonight.
i can't help but believe as a former prosecutor they are moving toward indicting donald trump. the dam of accountability he's been protected by is about to break. >> this week on what our next guest says is inevitable, an attorney general repelled by drama and unnecessary stress tests will deliver the justice department the ultimate test of criminal charges against a former american president. frank spoke with merrick garland and despite the spectacle that such an indictment would create one of his friends said with dread, there's a simple reason he thinks he will do so. i have been observing garland closely for months talked with his friends and loyal clerks and
deputies and studied his record and interviewed garland and his devotion to procedure, belief in the rule of law and in particular his reverence for the duties, responsibilities and traditions of the united states department of justice will cause him to make the most monumental decision an attorney general can make. joining us the author of that piece for the atlantic. mary and harry back with usp i listened to you on the bulwark, right? >> yeah. >> had to talk to you because you describe this thing that most of us who don't know merrick garland like myself, is the fact that he would rather give birth to a unicorn that makes him most likely to do it, really the only conclusion you can draw if you adhere to the rule of law. explain your analysis. >> i should say that when i
spoke to him, he didn't comment about ongoing investigations. when the justice department says it doesn't talk about cases it's pursuing it means it. the thing about merrick garland, it's he's a cautious human being. when i talked to one of his best friends he dreads getting in the car with him because he drives so slowly because he's intent on following every traffic law imaginable. but, at the same time, there is this case that's emerged out of mar-a-lago where president trump, former president trump, has been stashing documents that he's basically thumbed his nose at the department of justice. merrick garland is nothing if not a creature of the department of justice. he's worked there on several tours. the first time he worked there was in the late '70s as a young lawyer working for the attorney general and when he worked there the last time, sorry, when he worked there in the 1970s, he was part of creating the modern
justice department, norms that would prevent watergate from happening again. one of the norms they ensidelined into policy and procedure was that justice department would treat friends and foes in the same way and that justice department would behave in an apolitical nonpartisan way. when we get to this case, the mar-a-lago case, you see the ways in which trump and his defenders have thumbed their nose at the justice department and acted as if they are, indeed, above the law. they've argued that the justice department has planted evidence. they've unleashed a series of attacks against fbi employees so for an institutionalist like merrick garland and this notion that nobody is above the law this is the place he hits his limits. it's so black and white. this is not january 6th filled with complexities this is simple
and falls in merrick garland's sweet spot. >> something legal analysts talk about is the novelty and one of the challenges of charging the january 6th case the novelty of them charging an ex-president with seditious conspiracy is unthinkable and novel. mishandling classified documents not so much. i think the government charges those cases all the time. if there's a concern you don't charge trump it's difficult to charge the next edward snowden? >> i'm sure he thinks about things like that, but they really fall i think closer to the recesses of his mind. i think that he's thinking about this case and how the law applies specifically in this instance and so yes, i think that this tends to be an area the mishandling of classified documents that triggers the justice department as a whole in a very particular sort of way,
and i'm sure that's escalated things to him more quickly than the january 6th investigations have. but i really do think when it comes to the ultimate decision of whether to go forward when you reach that moment of prosecutorial discretion, when garland is the prosecutor and the discretion is his, i think it's really how does the law apply in this instance and bring a case that can persuade a jury that will stick on appeal. i think the black and white nature of this tips time. >> from your understanding of him and from talking to people close to him, you know, something that's so -- i've covered trump for six years and the response to being under investigation is identical. he's treating merrick garland and the fbi and doj the same way he treated adam schiff after the first impeachment and jamie raskin after the second. he does it to everyone. sending lawyers out to lie for him, michael cohen went to jail about how many times he talked
about russia, christina bobb is heading down that path, alex cannon, now you have a military chef and valet that may have committed perjury for trump. does the pattern of obstructing justice, it sounds like nothing weighs on merrick garland but something he's cognizant of? does he care about recidivism? >> i'm sure he cares about recidivism and i know that he, you know, he claimed publicly he would watch the january 6th hearings in congress and i know for a fact he did watch them all in a typically merrick garland meticulous sort of way. it's not like he's oblivious to all of this. i think when he was a judge, he had a very specific style of ruling on cases, which was very nonideological, he didn't try to apply any grand theory. he tried to look at the facts in
the specific matter in front of him. again, my sense is that's the way that he thinks ability this. i'm sure, you know, the other interesting thing to say about merrick garland is that he's changed over time. when you read his speeches, since he's become attorney general, it's clear that he's much more clued in to the existential threats that our democracy faces and that's become a bigger and bigger theme of him as he's gone on. as that's happened, i would say that he's adopted darker view of america's future, more pessimistic, and i think it also has allowed him to be more confrontational as he has been in the mar-a-lago cases than in previous instances. >> harry, franklin adds to what is public facing for those of us who don't know merrick garland, what we understand about him, an interesting passage where he describes garland's reaction to
being called an institutionalist he says i don't describe myself that way. franklin writes the unstated implication was he knows what it takes to prevail. with this addition to sort of our understanding as the public of merrick garland, what do you think? do you think charging donald trump for the crimes at mar-a-lago and the investigation is imminent and inevitable? >> not exactly. i agree and admire much of what is in franklin's article but i've known the guy for 35 years and worked at doj. the conversation you cite is important, he notes going to a springsteen concert. i'm sure he's a very careful driver, but it's very important to distinguish between him as a judge where passivity is the core kind of value and him as a prosecutor, he is a ferocious
and aggressive protector of the rule of law. i don't think this sort of ultra passive portrait drawn especially from his judge days and his public facing really go -- tells the whole story. i also think that at the end of the day, sorry, go ahead. >> no, go ahead. >> yeah. i do think at the end of the day he also won't let himself off that easy. it won't be i agree it just with what you said the mar-a-lago charges are more straightforward and how can you not bring them and then bring the next snowden or the last snowden, but i don't think he'll be oblivious to everything that's out there. he will force himself to decide. franklin notes it might be a tragedy either way. he will take that heat either way, but i think he will think of the broader issues as well. i just want to stress that to my experience, he's neither as robotic nor as mooek as some of
the public portraits have him being. >> there's nobody of greater interest i think in the views of most of my viewers and nobody more of a mystery to them. all of your insights are so valuable. franklin and harry, thank you so much. mary sticks around. a quick break for us. when we come back, how republicans are flooding the zone at voting sites with so-called watchers. they are not that. it is a call to action intending to sow doubt and fear around the country and chaos. it's still unclear how many will come out on election day. come oy what will you do? ♪ what will you change? ♪ will you make something better? ♪ will you create something entirely new? ♪ our dell technologies advisors provide you with the tools and expertise you need to do incredible things.
because we believe there's an innovator in all of us. bipolar depression. it made me feel trapped in a fog. this is art inspired by real stories of bipolar depression. i just couldn't find my way out of it. the lows of bipolar depression can take you to a dark place. latuda could make a real difference in your symptoms. latuda was proven to significantly reduce bipolar depression symptoms. and in clinical studies, had no substantial impact on weight. this is where i want to be. call your doctor about sudden behavior changes or suicidal thoughts. antidepressants can increase these in children and young adults. elderly dementia patients have increased risk of death or stroke. report fever, confusion, stiff or uncontrollable muscle movements, which may be life threatening or permanent. these aren't all the serious side effects. now i'm back where i belong. ask your doctor if latuda is right for you. pay as little as zero dollars for your first prescription. technically when enamel is gone, you cannot get it back. but there are ways you can repair it. i'm excited about pronamel repair because it penetrates deep into the tooth to help actively repair acid-weakened enamel.
alarming new reporting on a story we've been kofrg all week about how national extremist groups have localized to try to disrupt the upcoming midterm elections. axios says members of the proud boys and oath keepers have been targeting local voters and election workers by signing up as poll watchers and the dropbox watchers whose harassment have led to complaints from voters across the country. some of the pictures we showed you yesterday. our guest mary warned mayors about the threat to local elections and what she's hearing on right wing social networks like this, quote, focus on county over country. capture your local county then several of them and then maybe your state, mccord wrote, quoting from a post on gab. we're back with mary.
tell me what you warned them and what they can do about these threats. >> yeah. thank you. you know, this is not totally dissimilar to the things we were worried about in 2020, but there's been more strategy and organizing between 2020 and these midterms so that there are very localized efforts driven by those who are trying to make sure there's a concerted effort at the local level, right, not all necessarily operating independently, but a very, very concerted effort at a decentralized voter intimidation scheme, as well as election worker intimidation scheme, really anything to muck things up. so in addition to the things you've been showing your viewers this week like people set up outside ballot dropboxs to videotape people trying to deposit their ballots, signage outside of drop boxes misleading and false and suggests you might
be committing a crime by depositing your ballot even if states where that's not a crime these are intimidating but also, you know, other types of efforts to just make it very, very difficult. election officials are being inundated with public records requests. public records requests are important was for members of the public to get transparency from their government. it's something i use in my litigation practice, many people do, but this is part of a concerted effort to inundate them with thousands of requests so that they're so busy responding to these, these requests for information, detailed information about how they're handling election administration, that it will paralyze them from doing their jobs. we're seeing efforts across multiple different jurisdictions across the country to pressure officials into going back to using paper ballots, something that we know is not nearly as
reliable as computerized ballots with a paper record. all these efforts are part of this strategy to not only threaten and intimidate but also really gum up the works which will lead to the ability to file lawsuits, they might be frivolous, baseless, but trying to set up a rationale that would allow the filing of those suits. it's important for mayors, police chiefs, election officials, secretaries of state, to sort of see the bigger picture because sometimes i think you know -- you don't really see what's happening in your community might connect elsewhere, and make strong statements against this. make sure they're prepared. chief ramsey was on that call with the mayors with me on monday and said, you know, you need to be meeting right now in your communities with your law enforcement, your election officials, your mayors, your community activists, voting
rights individuals, et cetera both parties, making plans right now to make sure everyone has the ability to vote without intimidation or fear and to protect our election officials. >> mary, i don't know that there's any story more important over the next 12 days and perhaps it will go on to the day after election day. we're going to continue to call on you on some of what you're hearing from the mayors and local leaders. thank you so much for stick around and talking to us about this. >> of course. up next for us, hundreds of thousands of votes have been cast already in pennsylvania. the first and only senate debate is in the books. it generated a lot of commentary but did it change any minds in pennsylvania? we'll talk to someone who might know the answer to that question next. r to that question next
we've got questions about medicare plans. well, we've got a lot of answers! how can i help? well for starters, do you have a medicare plan i can actually afford? how about a plan with a $0 monthly premium? well, that's a great start. what other benefits can we get? things like dental, vision and hearing. but let me help you pick the plan that's right for you. ooooooooh! [laughs] don't wait, call 1-888-65-aetna to get answers to your questions and pick a plan that's right for you and let's make healthier happen, together. tony here from creditrepair.com, taking
to the streets to talk about credit. what's a good credit score? go. -600. maybe, if you're trying to pay thousands extra in interest rates. cut the confusion at creditrepair.com. if you still have symptoms of moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis or active psoriatic arthritis after a tnf blocker like humira or enbrel, rinvoq is different and may help. stand up to your symptoms with rinvoq. rinvoq is a once-daily pill that tackles pain, stiffness, swelling. for some, rinvoq significantly reduces ra and psa fatigue. it can stop further irreversible joint damage. and rinvoq can leave skin clear or almost clear in psa. that's rinvoq relief. rinvoq can lower your ability to fight infections, including tb. serious infections and blood clots, some fatal; cancers, including lymphoma and skin cancer; death, heart attack, stroke, and tears in the stomach or intestines occurred. people 50 and older with at least one heart disease risk factor have higher risks.
don't take if allergic to rinvoq as serious reactions can occur. tell your doctor if you are or may become pregnant. ask your rheumatologist for rinvoq. rinvoq. make it your mission. learn how abbvie could help you save. ♪♪ choosing miracle-ear was a great decision. like when i decided to host family movie nights. miracle-ear made it easy. i just booked an appointment and a certified hearing care professional evaluated my hearing loss and helped me find the right device calibrated to my unique hearing needs. now i enjoy every moment. the quiet ones and the loud ones. make a sound decision. call 1-800 miracle now, and book your free hearing evaluation.
let's also talk about the elephant in the room. i had a stroke. he's never let me forget that. and i might miss some words during this debate, mush two words together, but it knocked me down but i'm going to keep coming back up, and this campaign is all about to me is about fighting for everyone in pennsylvania that ever got knocked down, that needs to get back up and fighting for all forgotten communities all across pennsylvania. >> so, you already know who that was. democratic senate candidate john fetterman and we broadcast it. it was from the opening
statement of last night's one and only debate between john fetterman and dr. oz. in politics we call that hanging a lantern around what might be viewed as a political problem. fetterman reminding viewers, reminding voters he is going to fumble once or twice because he's recovering from a stroke. the candidates then sparred over abortion, crime and energy policy as the eyes of the country fixated on this debate and this race in part because it could determine control of the 50/50 senate. despite all the national attention the only thing that matters at this point is what the people of pennsylvania thought about last night and what they decide to do in 13 days. to answer that question let's bring in pennsylvania capitol star editor in chief, john misek. this was the topic of so much commentary. how did it land in the commonwealth? i heard from one prominent democrat who said, he wasn't a
great debater before he had a stroke. it wasn't like he was robbed of his most sterling political attribute but if you didn't know or you weren't following politics closely, i'm curious what the morning drive radio was about or on the front page of the newspaper. >> this would not have been an ideal format for him even if not recovering from a stroke. he is not a natural debater. mehmet oz used to speaking in sound bites, feeling very much at home. you know, i'll tell you, there were two minutes or two instances last night where my phone buzzed while it. the first where fetterman stumbled through an answer on fracking, when he was asked if he first supported it or opposed it said he always supported it. he stuck to his guns and said he supported it. some democrats voiced concern to
me last night about that and mehmet oz's line about abortion where he said it was a matter between the doctor, the patient and local elected officials, a line that launched a thousand memes and an ad from the fetterman campaign. waking up this morning, you heard a lot of people who were where they were on tuesday night, democrats still concerned but still settling behind john fetterman, republicans coalescing a bit more confident in mehmet oz getting past -- the carpetbagger tag by fetterman and republicans might have felt a little more at home with mehmet oz than they did going into last night. >> what was the sort of sense of how the decision to participate in the debate was made? you know, were people -- a senior democratic official said to me that just what you said
there are not a lot of undecided voters. it's a state inundated with political activity basically since the day the 2020 presidential campaign ended so to your point about not a lot of undecideds, what was the decision to debate? how was that received in the state? >> you know, there's -- john fetterman dodged the debate during the primary season and took a lot of grief for that. we had newspaper editorial boards here in pennsylvania, i think "the post gazette" and "philadelphia inquirer" calling him out to debate and this is a race of such great consequence it could determine the control of the senate in the next congress. pennsylvania voters deserve to get a measure of these two men. as we sit here this morning, something worth 670,000 pennsylvanians have already cast ballots and two weeks out from election day. so there are a lot of people critical of the timing of this coming just two weeks out from november 8th, but there are a
lot of people who really were calling for these two guys to face each other. >> you're someone we have turned to when we have wanted to really understand the views of the people who will make these decisions and we're grateful to get to talk to you today. john micek, thank you so much. up next for us, as john just said, republican dr. oz gave democrats exactly what they felt they needed ahead of election day, a comment on tape in a debate of an outof touch and extreme republican on abortion rights. we'll bring you that part of the story next. don't go anywhere. couldn't finy out of it. the lows of bipolar depression can take you to a dark place. latuda could make a real difference in your symptoms. latuda was proven to significantly reduce bipolar depression symptoms. and in clinical studies, had no substantial impact on weight. this is where i want to be. call your doctor about sudden behavior changes or suicidal thoughts. antidepressants can increase these in children and young adults.
elderly dementia patients have increased risk of death or stroke. report fever, confusion, stiff or uncontrollable muscle movements, which may be life threatening or permanent. these aren't all the serious side effects. now i'm back where i belong. ask your doctor if latuda is right for you. pay as little as zero dollars for your first prescription. ♪ what will you do? ♪ what will you change? ♪ will you make something better? ♪ will you create something entirely new? ♪ our dell technologies advisors provide you with the tools and expertise you need to do incredible things. because we believe there's an innovator in all of us.
kids getting hooked on flavored tobacco, including e-cigarettes. big tobacco lures them in with flavors like lemon drop and bubble gum, candy flavors that get them addicted to tobacco products, and can lead to serious health consequences, even harming their brain development. that's why pediatricians urge you to vote yes on prop 31. it stops the sale of dangerous flavored tobacco and helps protect kids from nicotine addiction. please vote yes on 31. vote yes on prop 31.
as a physician, i've been in the room when there's some difficult conversations happening. i don't want the federal government involved with that at all. i want women, doctors, local political leaders letting the democracy that's always allowed our nation to thrive to put the best ideas forward so states can decide for themselves. >> it's 5:00 in new york. one of those things is not like the other, women, doctors and local political officials? what? he let the cat out of the back. gop candidate dr. oz saying out loud the republican plan insert the government, put them in the room with the woman making a decision about her body and her reproductive health and her family. a statement only clarifying and underscoring and putting back into the headlines the extreme positions and stakes of this year's midterm elections following the supreme court's decision to overyear 50 years of precedent that protected a woman's right to choose,
democrats found protecting abortion rights to be an energizing issue for its voters and among republican and independents, as well. it's an issue they're making central in the general election which means that oz with his statement last night handed democrats exactly what they might have needed at this point in the midterms. this morning, oz's opponent john fetterman already had a new ad out using oz's words calling him too extreme for pennsylvania. the republican party's extremist also featured prominently in the debate from michigan governor. take a look at this exchange between current governor gretchen whitmer and trump backed tudor dixon. >> when governor whitmer tells you that this is going to be roe, it's not even close to roe. it's not codifying roe in our constitution but it would be the most radical abortion law in the entire country. the only place that has something similar are china and north korea. >> none of what she just said is not true and here's why you
can't trust her when it comes to reproductive rights. she said a 14-year-old child raped by her uncle is a perfect example of someone who should not have reproductive rights and the ability to choose. she went further to say it is healing for a person who's raped to carry that child to term. >> i couldn't disagree more. she's proven you cannot trust her on this issue. >> michigan has a pre-roe law that would have gone into effect after the supreme court overturned roe, a 1931 law that bans abortion in all instances except for the life of the mother, if not for governor whitmer filing a lawsuit to suspend. president biden made clear abortion rights are very high on his legislative priority list if democrats keep control of congress. >> care about the right to choose then you got to vote. that's why in these midterm elections they're so critical, elect more democratic senators
and more democrats to keep control of the house of representatives. folks, if we do that, here's the promise i make to you and the american people, the first bill that i will send to the congress will be to codify roe v. wade. and when congress passes it i'll sign it in january, 50 years after roe was first decided the law of the land. >> women's reproductive rights on the ballot and back in the news thanks to dr. oz is where we begin the hour with some of our favorite reporters. joining us fatima, also minnie, and kimberly is here, a senior opinion writer for "the boston globe" and "the emancipator." kim, i start with you. there are moments when things aren't what everybody thinks they are. and john fetterman's health is a known known.
dr. oz putting local politicians in the room with the woman making an excruciating choice was an unforced error. >> it really was and i think that it centers the stakes that are in this election, i think there's been a lot of talk, not all i agree with but the impact of overturning roe has somehow been muted as election day draws near. i don't think that's the case and i think this comment from dr. oz, who is a physician but he himself before coming into politics was best known for hawking, you know, fat melting pills that caused him to be hauled in front of congress and grilled by a bipartisan committee. certainly is not the best arbiter of this and he proved that in that debate last night, but in so doing he really crystallized for voters exactly what the stakes are in the midterms and how important that they are. >> you know, what's interesting
about it, minnie, is that republicans have all the evidence they need of how unpopular their extreme views on abortion are. they were rejected by kansas republicans, upward of 80% of all voters oppose their bans, most of their bans eliminate exceptions for rape and incest, some even eliminate exceptions for life of the mother. let me put up all the states with bans in effect from reporting in "the new york times." alabama, louisiana, oklahoma, tennessee, west virginia, wisconsin, idaho, arizona bans abortion at 15 weeks. utah at 18 weeks. mis, texas, arkansas, kentucky, missouri, south dakota, georgia has a ban at 6 week, florida, 15 weeks and north carolina at 20 weeks. they're on the other side of public opinion on this issue and you have one of the highest stake races in the country. oz putting local politicians in the room. it was stuns, but it might have
just been an accidental reveal, right? >> it was such -- it was such a crystallizing moment. i've been touring the country meeting with voters in many of the states you mentioned. i'm in pennsylvania tomorrow. you know, saying local politicians really spells out the stakes at play here. you can say return the issue to the states and states' rights. that's hard to grasp. the idea of doug mastriano, the extremist running for governor in pennsylvania, when i have to make a life and death decision about my pregnancy, it's horrifying. thank you, dr. oz, for spelling out the stakes in this campaign and folks ask us where is abortion on the ballot? you just showed the map. abortion is now on the ballot in almost every race in this country. you've got the states with the bource bans, you also have the states where folks understand so clearly that should these extremists take over congress folks like dr. oz, we're facing
a national federal abortion ban that could impact folks in states like illinois, california, new york where they're expanding access and trying to codify protections in their state constitutions much like governor whitmer is trying to do in michigan. >> mini, what are you hearing from voters? >> i've been lucky to talk to a lot of younger voters. met with a group of high school students campaigning for congresswoman lauren underwood in the chicago suburbs and i was with arizona state students about a week ago. what i'm hearing, they understand that they are the first generation -- we've all lost a fundamental constitutional right but they're losing this right at the beginning of their reproductive lives and that is a terrifying thought but it's also incredibly motivating and it's directly causing registration and activism numbers to spike. we're seeing really strong energy on college campuses. the kids at arizona state were telling me, another point about the mick impact of these
policies, they were telling me they're telling friends not to come to arizona to go to college so the stakes are incredibly high. young people get it. that plus the energy we're seeing from suburban women in some of these key races is really powerful. >> fatima, take me inside what the facts are around these issues, because i think at this point with two weeks out a lot have voted already. they tend to be more organized, right? they knew they would vote but if there are people out there still trying to figure out what to do or people are getting a lot of mixed signals about the political climate, whether or not to vote, what is your message to them? >> i hope people took the debate over the last week as a big reminder that your vote really matters. it matters who is going to be in that room making a decision. will it be a local politician passing a ban and these aren't hypothetical consequences from
the bans. we had a chance over the last few months to see what the consequences are. it means 10, 12, 14-year-olds having to travel out of state to get care. it means providers afraid to save someone's life. it means someone being forced to stay pregnant when they don't want to be. the consequences are huge and there is not room for oz or anyone else at whatever level in that room making a decision. >> the other thing, kim, that i think is hard to sort of articulate and explain is the climate is so fearful. i mean, women -- i said this before -- have eliminated ovulation trackers from their apple watches. women are afraid of calling cars and uber drivers are now, you know, among the people that could be ensnared in texas' laws. how true of a read do you think we have on how this issue plays
ahead of actual voting? >> yeah, i think that's a very important point. i mean, you have women who don't know if they have an iud if they travel to another state whether they're immediately breaking a law. it's quite remarkable and at the same time, you have this election coming up, republicans who as we've discussed before seems to politically have been like the dog that caught the car and didn't know exactly what to do leading up to the midterms in talking about this issue which is so outraging to so many people that they've begun messaging nonsensical things like pegging democrats as the party that wants no restrictions ever right up until the day of birth, which, of course, is not true and that is not what roe did and i think that one thing that is telling us, given all of that, a solution would be the proposal that was put forth in congress that would basically put the law back to where roe
was. it has bipartisan support, republicans susan collins and lisa murkowski back it and would basically put the ball back, put the genie back in the bottle but even that is facing opposition. it's really just a terrifying time and it's so politicized with republicans either messaging like dr. oz did, putting your local politicians into your doctor's offices or making false claims about what the other side wants to do in a way that is really just spurring a lot of fear but at the same time as we've been discussing also bringing a lot of awareness to voters about just what the stakes are. >> well, when they say that they want a woman, her daughter and the local politician in the room, they're also channeling and projecting their plans to criminalize and localize the consequences. i mean, they support bans, so if you're saying in dr. oz's words, local politicians, local politicians include sheriffs and
include mayors. who the hell wants rudy giuliani in the room? regardless of where you stand, it is such -- we checked before we came on the air to see if that statement had been walked back. it is, indeed, the position of the republican senate candidate in pennsylvania. and i wonder, mini, if you think there's enough time to make people understand what republicans plan is to outlaw and criminalize abortion in america. >> yes, there is 13 days left and i think the american people clearly understand. the fight is less about persuading americans who the extremists are on this issue. our candidates have been incredibly clear, in fact, john fetterman has been out there up front supporting the women's health protection act. that's the democratic led bill that passed the house twice. and got 49 votes in the senate but has been held up by the filibuster so we have a clear contrast with our democratic candidates and republicans and i believe, nicolle, it's a turnout game. it's about making sure folks on
our side, a coalition of democrats nonaffiliated voters or independents and some soft republicans remember that abortion is on the line this election. they get this. they care about this. they know who the villains are but they have to be motivated to vote this a midterm and that's the tough part so all about turnout and mobilization at this point. >> fatima, the conversation after the supreme court overturned roe and what kim is talking about is sort of putting roe back, was the unifying message, that was where all democrats, vast majorities of independents and a plurality of republicans stood and that's what the kansas results reflected. how do you keep that? how do you maintain that this is the consensus position and the republicans including oz are in the -- outside of the mainstream? >> but i think you saw the president speak to it last week. the bill that would do that is the women's health protection act and it is teed up and ready to go if they have the majority.
and the contrast on the other side is the 15-week ban, the nationwide ban that lindsey graham teed up this fall so i think there is a contrast. there is a way to do it and people need to be reminded that it is not just a state here or there, it's not just arizona. this is on the ballot in every state and up and down the ballot. >> so i have to update a story we covered a bit. the republican position on abortion isn't just extreme, it's also showcasing rank hypocrisy talking about herschel walker. a second woman says herchel walker was involved in her abortion. do what i say and not what i have done and done and done and done and paid for and done is also something that's out there and on the minds of voters? >> i mean, i think in this election, if the stakes weren't already high, even if abortion
were not a crucial issue, the caliber of candidates that are left for republicans among those who still pledge allegiance to donald trump gets you people like herschel walker and dr. oz. that is a fundamental problem for the republican party when you don't have quality candidates who can debate ideas and who only go out speaking nonsense and acting in a nonsensical way so i think that speaks to a really big problem that republicans have right now. but i wanted to also make a point that many brought up about turnout. you know, in "the emancipator" we have a piece talking about the other swing voters. that what consists of is young people mostly of color who choose between voting democratic or being so disenchanted they don't volt at all and i think issues like this, what is happening with abortion swings that to them voting and 8% in a midterm election can be a
powerful contingent of the electorate and i think that will be part of the story in 13 days. >> i think that's absolutely right and when you've seen midterm history defy the traditions, it is always because of that dynamic. my colleague joy reid was in texas in fort worth in dallas, texas, yesterday on the show. she posted this thread. i have to share it with you. sort of about the dead weight that is the supreme court on republicans. joy tweeted last night in fort worth after a long time posing for selfies and chatting with people a woman walked up to me as my producers and i were getting in our suv. she thanked us for coming to fort worth and added, i feel like i live in gilead. her voice was shaking and i thought she might cry. i have daughters, she said and her voice trailed off. i assured her it would be okay that this awfulness can be fixed but i was leaving gilead. i have yet to talk to a woman of any age or race on the phone or anywhere who is not pissed off or terrified about the religious
fanatics on the supreme court handing women and girls over to state politicians. the only question is will enough women take the one action they can to prevent us from becoming gilead complete with the violent insurrection, commander lindsey graham's promised national abortion ban and democracy deniers controlling and essentially ending elections by voting. what do you think, fatima? >> i think they will. for all the reasons that many have outlined but these stories, the stories of the mom, the stories of the friend, the stories of people who are terrified. they're personal. >> mini, i hear -- i spent time in the republican party and hear from republicans and pro-life women who say, i felt that under roe we had these lines and that roe and casey were decided with republicans made me feel like those were bipartisan legal judgments and that when all of the current members of the supreme court said i respect roe
we had new reporting this week that kennedy didn't trust alito when he said i respect it. i mean, kavanaugh called casey precedent, they were all lying. they were all lying. that this other issue of being lied to by the supreme court, which had this plan to deviate dramatically from their predecessors, the republicans who sided with democrats in roe and casey, is this thing that's hard to measure but it is this feeling that everything has become so charged and political. what do you make of that sort of, you know, kim is talking about turnout and swing. what about that sliver of even pro-life voters or republican voters who say this is too much, this is too far. this is extreme? >> you know, in the eight out of ten americans that support the constitutional right to abortion, we've always known that included folks who self-identify as pro-life or republican, that's why we call a soft republican. they might ticket split in various cases in certain states and various issues.
pat ryan, the kansas ballot initiative. none of those would have been the victories they were without a significant number of independent voters and republican voters. you can't beat a poll that's an actual election. an actual election is the best poll so no reason to believe we can't still go after those voters and talk about the issue as a fundamental freedom, a reproductive freedom. we get a lot more crossover support from republicans and independents who are, you're right, completely, you know -- if you feel disenfranchised by the current extremist maga republican party and are looking for a place to go and so there's an opportunity to build a bigger, broader coalition around the issue of reproductive freedom but also around defending our democracy and making the connection between these issues so i think it's a powerful opportunity to organize outside of just the base. we have to turn out our base. we have the numbers but can cross over and build a broader coalition. >> three of the smartest minds on something so important before
voters in these midterms, fatima goss graves, kimberly grove storr and mini timmaraju. on issue after issue their policies like creating more access to guns for anyone, deep tax and spending cuts, but make those things worse in our country for the very issues they claim to be trying to fix. that conversation with our good friends, matt dodd and cornell belcher next and bob woodward is our guest. he has taken an unprecedented step and released hours of raw audio from his interviews with the twice impeached disgraced ex-president. what they reveal coming up. "deadline: white house" continues after a quick break. don't go anywhere. to severe rhes or active psoriatic arthritis after a tnf blocker like humira or enbrel, rinvoq is different and may help.
stand up to your symptoms with rinvoq. rinvoq is a once-daily pill that tackles pain, stiffness, swelling. for some, rinvoq significantly reduces ra and psa fatigue. it can stop further irreversible joint damage. and rinvoq can leave skin clear or almost clear in psa. that's rinvoq relief. rinvoq can lower your ability to fight infections, including tb. serious infections and blood clots, some fatal; cancers, including lymphoma and skin cancer; death, heart attack, stroke, and tears in the stomach or intestines occurred. people 50 and older with at least one heart disease risk factor have higher risks. don't take if allergic to rinvoq as serious reactions can occur. tell your doctor if you are or may become pregnant. ask your rheumatologist for rinvoq. rinvoq. make it your mission. learn how abbvie could help you save.
we've got questions about medicare plans. make it your mission. well, we've got a lot of answers! how can i help? well for starters, do you have a medicare plan i can actually afford? how about a plan with a $0 monthly premium? well, that's a great start. what other benefits can we get? things like dental, vision and hearing. but let me help you pick the plan that's right for you. ooooooooh! [laughs] don't wait, call 1-888-65-aetna to get answers to your questions and pick a plan that's right for you and let's make healthier happen, together. ♪♪ i had a bad relationship with my student loan. the interest was costing me... well, us... a fortune. so, i refinanced with sofi. break up with bad student loan debt. to help, we're paying off up to a million dollars of student debt. sofi get your money right.
a million dollars of student debt. maybe the only way he can die... is if i die too. [ screaming ] with the midterms less than two weeks away republican candidates have been claiming that they alone can fix it. >> we have the best policies. we've got common sense policies to solve some of these issues. obviously people are very concerned about the economy. >> we need to make our streets safe again. i'm running to take back our streets and to support unapologetically our men and women in law enforcement. >> would you do anything, though, in housing, rent, gas to drive down those costs? you'll have 30 seconds. >> you have to grow our economy. >> very heavy bluster and pronouncements, very light on specifics. new reporting shows republican policies that actually make the problems they're running on worse, "the new york times"
today whites this, while republicans insist they will be better stewards of the economy, few economists on either side of the ideological spectrum expect the parties' proposals to meaning fully reduce inflation in the short term. some of what republicans are imposing including tax cuts for high earners could make price pressures worse, end quote. and apart from stopping crime, republican policies are exacerbating it. "the new york times" again reporting that an effort by republicans to loosen gun laws is leading to more crime. they report this, quote, a series of recent studies has found a link between laws that make it easier to quarry a handgun and increases in crime and some have raised the possibility that more guns in circulation lead to more thefts of weapons and to more shootings by the police. joining us political strategist matt dowd and cornell belcher. both msnbc contributors.
we have all had the job of working for candidates in campaigns where we had to find the issue that benefited us. in this case the issues that republicans have decided benefit them actually hurt us, right? if they prevail on these issues they will make crime and inflation worse in america, matt dowd. >> well, i think that's factually true but, again, i'll go back to what we talked about before. if i were advising a candidate republicans have huge advantages whether appropriate or not on inflation and on crime, huge advantages. what you don't want to do as a candidate is fight on that turf and what you do want is fight on the turf that you're strongest on. that's where i would shift it immediately. the best way to do that in my view say the republicans have zero plans to solve crime, zero plans to solve inflation. zero plans to deal with those things in your life but what they do have is a plan to undermine democracy and that's going to take away your rights, your freedoms and not allow you to get anything you want and hold the government accountable.
that's the battle so as quickly in my view as quickly as you can shift from a republican advantage issue and say they have no plans but what they do have a plan on is a threat to democracy and then that's what you run on. >> cornell, matt is usually right about these things. i guess my question for you, a lot of candidates are doing that. there are a lot of candidates doing just that and i think the strength of the democratic candidates and the weakness of many of the republican candidates and people like oz saying out loud i'm going to put a woman and a doctor and a local mayor in the room when she makes a decision about a pregnancy is mart of the reason why that point gets proven over and over again about the dangers of republicans. but what do you make of sort of the last two weeks here? what should people be talking about? >> well, listen, as i am part of the media now and my side hustle, i'm going to feel free to come after the media because, look, dowd is right.
first thing as a candidate is you want to have debate on the issues where you have the strength so don't take the bait on making this election all about the economy and inflation because that's republican turf. you got to broaden that conversation, but i'm going to take a large swipe at the media and i think we got to do a better job of reporting. look, your piece coming in was spot on. republicans actually don't have much of a plan on how, in fact, to bring down gas prices and they've not had to answer to that. they don't actually have much of a plan on how to bring down inflation because we actually know that the president or congress, there's no magical button they can push to bring down inflation as the folks in the uk right now. so what's your plan to actually tackle inflation? what's your plan to bring down gas prices? i've been watching ad after ad
and congressional battleground races where republicans simply blame democrats for inflation and high gas prices and never talk about sort of how they're going to -- what they're going to do to bring it down. at some point as a campaign, campaigns shouldn't have to do all of the explaining, right? we in the news as reporters should do some -- do more fact finding and digging in. what exactly is the republican plan to bring down inflation and gas prices and they should be asked that every day. they shouldn't be let off the hook on that every single day they're let off on the hook off and truth of the matter is as you and i both know there is no magic silver bullet for bringing down inflation. if republicans take back congress in fact their tax cuts, i mean, heck, speaking of the uk they threw out the republican plan in the uk. the torys dropped the same plan
republicans are trying to do they're trying to do in the united states. we need to do a better job of holding them accountable. >> cornell, i'm so glad you took this in this direction. it took -- >> me too. >> -- us as a show five minutes to find prominent republican, the first was steven moore and the day that truss resigned we showed him celebrating. he said the cavalry is coming. we're bringing this to you when we win in three weeks. not only do they promise to do what ended truss' prime minister tenure in what, 2 1/2 scaramouchies, they're running on the vapidness of the issues they're trying to politicize. i don't disagree with matthew you're fighting on the wrong terrain but part of my responsibility is to show what they view as strengths are weaknesses running on economic policies so catastrophic they ended truss' prime minister term in a historically short tenure
and then on crime that's pretty hollow as well. everyone is scared about crime. but no one is in more danger of being the victim of violent crime than the very people they're blaming for the crime. it is all empty. it is all bankrupt and you're right. it shouldn't fall to candidates to make all of these points, but it seems that there is something that people are sort of slow walking through that is not based in fact. how do you sort of truth up the conversations in the final two weeks? >> well, here is -- let me jump in real quickly. here is the uncomfortable part. and we all -- most of us who are students of politics know this. when they're talking about crime they're not really talking about crime. right? they're talking about -- when they're having a conversation about law and order, it is the southern strategy. it is what -- going back to nixon, right? it is a doubling down on tribalalism. you remember in 2020, trump saying if i lose the suburbs are going to be on fire. i remember that.
and a lot of people who look like me remember that because that was -- that was a threat about the other, right? and it is can we scare enough white voters so that they will put aside any of their other interests and simply vote for out of fear? out of fear of the other. i have seen these commercials they're running in wisconsin and the commercials they're running in new york and it's all this fear of the others, of those people coming to take what we have and hurt us and that is an awfully, awfully terrible way to divide this country and double down on tribalism so i got to call it for what it is. it is doubling down on the southern strategy and it is race matters politics and it's ugly. >> matthew, what is the answer? what can the response to that? >> well, i mean, i would like to
just pile on to something cornell started and you know my feeling about this, which is, yes, candidates have responsibility to run the best possible campaigns and do all that and we've had that conversation over and over but the media really has a big responsibility and this is not -- i have -- i think the media in the last five or six years has done a disservice to our democracy. not all, but many in the media. it's this gamification of politics where let's talk about the forecast model and who is up and let's talk about whether or not somebody slurred a word at the debate and whether or not they're going to lose their senate seat and what are the odds here and they leave out the danger of what one side winning will do and not you, nicolle, and what will happen. it's just like, who's up, who's down? to me it's akin to a weather forecaster saying, oh, a hurricane just is now a category 3, good night. have a nice evening without telling people in a jurisdiction what that might mean, that
damage that could do and what they could do to prevent the damage. just the media saying who is up, who is down, where does it stand, where are the numbers -- first of all i believe they're based on a flawed assumption, this idea of approval ratings driving it. this year proves it is not and it's anybody's guess as to what will happen. we have not seen an election where neither party has a wave coming and it will be completely dependent on who turns out in this election but i think the media needs to stop with the gaming of the politics and start with, if somebody wins, what does that mean? and what can a voter do about that that threatens their own safety, democracy and all of that? i think it's an incumbent responsibility to get off the game of politics and onto what this really means in the choice really to be had. >> that's a perfect place to stop, you get the last word but have to say something in defense of forecasters. even the forecast now comes with
deep analysis of how we got here. i just covered a hurricane and all of the weather experts, meteorologists had insights about climate change and, you know, so to your point about deepness, even forecasters sometimes do better than we do. matt dowd and cornell belcher, thank you very much. you always keep it real and i really appreciate it. to be continued. when we come back the twice impeached disgraced ex-president in newly released audiotapes from his 20 interviews with the "washington post"'s bob woodward. don't go anywhere. you don't want to miss this. g l. comfortable in shapeware fabric she moves with ease. confident on nights like these. depend silhouette. the only thing stronger than us, is you. vo: it's a new day. because now updated covid vaccines protect against both the original covid virus and omicron. just in time to say,
“oh, you bet i'll be there!” a whole lot more. bipolar depression. it made me feel trapped in a fog. this is art inspired by real stories of bipolar depression. i just couldn't find my way out of it. the lows of bipolar depression can take you to a dark place. latuda could make a real difference in your symptoms. latuda was proven to significantly reduce bipolar depression symptoms. and in clinical studies, had no substantial impact on weight. this is where i want to be. call your doctor about sudden behavior changes or suicidal thoughts. antidepressants can increase these in children and young adults. elderly dementia patients have increased risk of death or stroke. report fever, confusion, stiff or uncontrollable muscle movements, which may be life threatening or permanent. these aren't all the serious side effects. now i'm back where i belong. ask your doctor if latuda is right for you. pay as little as zero dollars for your first prescription.
perhaps never before in american history has the public had access to such extensive correspondence, raw taped interviews between a journalist and a sitting president. the esteemed bob woodward calls his collection the trump tapes 20 separate interviews spanning eight hours in all whether or not you've heard about his reporting or read his books actually hearing it, the interviews themselves offer something new, an unprecedented and unfiltered look at some of the most consequential and damaging days of trump's one and only term and makes it clear insisting listening to the conversations offers new perspective that reading a printed page simply cannot. consider this one, from june of 2020. >> did somebody help you? >> yeah, i get -- i get people.
they come up with ideas but the ideas are mine, bob. the ideas are mine. >> and then -- >> want to know something? everything is mine. >> interesting on the other side of a coup. joining us bob woodward from "the washington post." his new audio book is titled "the trump tapes." bob, thank you so much for being here. i quote you at least once a week. >> thank you. >> saying the truth emerges. the truth emerges and your tapes go a long way toward helping the truth emerge. let me first ask you why you put them out there. >> because i listened to them earlier this year and i did not realize i was finishing the book "rage" which we put some of these tapes out, but not eight hours and when you listen to the eight hours, you realize that trump put the presidency in
moral freefall, literally time and time again looking out for himself, not the country, not focusing on what are the needs of the people. you hear his voice roar, literally roar and say, this is the way it is. i'm the only one who knows when he's making delicate negotiations with north korea, i asked what are you trying to do? get the thug kim jong-un to the bargaining table, and trump says, no, no, it's -- you know, it's instinct. well, the idea that instinct is driving this is part of the moral freefall and it's also something that just horrified his national security team.
>> you concluded and said this, he's dangerous. he's a threat to democracy and he's a threat to the presidency because he doesn't understand the core obligations that come with the office. do you think he is at the brink of facing consequences for that? do you think he'll be indicted? >> i have no idea whether he's going to be indicted. the january 6th house committee made a compelling lay down case that he really is engaged and supported the insurrection and the whole idea that the election is stolen, robert costa and i when we were on with you did our book "peril." we investigated these charges, and found out not that it's just the little off, there's zero evidence that the election was stolen, but it's something when you look at the data, even his
supporter, major supporters, senator lindsey graham of south carolina had his chief counsel, lee holmes, on the senate judiciary committee which lindsey graham chaired at the time investigate, spent weeks looking at this. there's nothing there. it's untrue. and this becomes the pillar of trump's effort to run again and it's just not there and you can see i'm quite exorcised about this and i got exorcised because i listened to the voice of donald trump in stages of denial, concealment and eventually on the coronavirus given the warning he had that he
hid from the american people, hid from me. it took me weeks to find out that he was warned in the most graphic detail. >> bob, i want to play some of the tapes. we have a couple. thank you for those that haven't been heard on tv before. this is from december 5th, 2019. this is trump on south korea. >> cost us 10 billion a year to protect south korea which is stupid. they've been paying us 500 million. >> but as you know the military people always tell you that's the best bargain we make, it's -- >> the military people are wrong. >> the best investment. >> i wouldn't say they were stupid because i would never say that about our military people but if they said that -- they -- whoever said that was stupid. it's a horrible bargain. we're protecting south korea from north korea and they're making a fortune with televisions and ships and everything else, right? they make so much money. >> nothing to learn in terms of
his military generals. what did this exchange reveal for you? bob, can you hear us? >> i don't hear it. >> we're going to make sure your audio is okay. we played this stunning exchange between you and donald trump on south korea. bob, we'll going to take a break and check your audio and be right back with more including one more clip from bob woodward's interviews with donald trump that has not been heard before. don't go anywhere.
♪ what will you do? will you make something better? create something new? our dell technologies advisors can provide you with the tools and expertise you need to bring out the innovator in you. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ this is the sound of better breathing. fasenra is an add-on treatment for asthma driven by eosinophils.
it helps prevent asthma attacks, improve breathing, and lower use of oral steroids. fasenra is not a rescue medication or for other eosinophilic conditions. fasenra may cause allergic reactions. get help right away if you have swelling of your face, mouth and tongue, or trouble breathing. don't stop your asthma treatments unless your doctor tells you to. tell your doctor if you have a parasitic infection or your asthma worsens. headache and sore throat may occur. ask your doctor about fasenra. once upon a time, at the magical everly estate, landscaper larry and his trusty crew...
were delayed when the new kid totaled his truck. timber... fortunately, they were covered by progressive, so it was a happy ending... for almost everyone. i've never been healthier. so it was a happy ending... shingles doesn't care. but shingrix protects. proven over 90% effective, shingrix is a vaccine used to prevent shingles in adults 50 years and older. shingrix does not protect everyone and is not for those with severe allergic reactions to its ingredients or to a previous dose. an increased risk of guillain-barré syndrome was observed after getting shingrix. fainting can also happen. the most common side effects are pain, redness and swelling at the injection site, muscle pain, tiredness, headache, shivering, fever, and upset stomach. ask your doctor or pharmacist about shingrix today. wayfair's way day is here! get low prices on thousands of items for your home. shop bedroom furniture from $7. and area rugs up to 80% off. shop way day before it's gone. at wayfair. ♪ wayfair, you've got just what i need ♪ when dehydration gets real... hey!
that's mine. i'll buy you a pony. advanced hydration isn't just for kids. pedialyte helps you hydrate during recovery. we are back with the one and only bob woodward. we played the exchange with you and donald trump where he basically says whoever in the military said that it was a good investment to protect south korea was stupid, i want to play a related conversation about why trump thought he understood nuclear foreign policy and diplomacy better than anyone else. let me play this. this is number two. >> because i know every one of the sites. i know all of them. better than any of my people i know. you understand better than any of my people i know. you understand that. better than anybody that works for you -- you know my uncle, i told you -- he was at mitt.
so my uncle i understand that stuff. genetically i have an uncle -- so i understand that stuff. what do you think he understood genetically? >> what he's talking about are the five nuclear sites that north korea has, and i'm quizzing on -- again, i had time to ask follow-up questions and he said he knew the most about them, he knew more than anyone, and he's so smart. and, again, it's the roar of i know everything. and here he says somehow there's a genetic -- i couldn't believe him and listen to him. he's got a genetic connection to
his smart uncle, and that somehow makes trump smart? again, this is the moral free fall of a sitting president of the united states for nine months is calling me, i'm calling him, and you get to see, you get to hear what he really cares about. >> what's amazing of the next clip i'm going to play is the date. this is about whether or not he's going to participate in the american tradition of a peaceful transfer of power. you asked him about this on june 3rd, 2020. this is number four from my team. >> well, we're going into the election. everyone keeps asking suppose it's a close election and it's contested. what are you going to do? everyone says trump is going to stay in the white house if it's
contested. >> well, i don't want to comment on that. i don't want to comment on that at this time. i'll talk to you later tonight. >> bob woodward, even i know he never has anywhere to go. talking to you was the priority when you were on the phone. why does he get off the phone when you ask him if he's going to concede if he loses? >> well, it's the one time in eight hours, 600 questions i ask of him. it's the one time he says he has no comment and makes an immediate exit. i blame myself for not following up on that, at that moment saying can you wait a minute or on the next interview ask because that was the foreshadowing we see of the denial about the election. and i wish i could have
really -- he would let me. and this is what's unusual about this, too. take one issue for 15 minutes and ask him these are the things you need to do about the virus. from the experts going through the list of coordinating with the intelligence community and defining what an essential worker is, the things that dr. fauci and everyone said needed to be done to mobilize the country, but trump wouldn't listen to them, was distracted or there would be virus deniers in the meeting. i mean, this is the tragedy. and then a month -- six weeks later i learned he was warned on january 28th in a way which i detail. it's not just, oh, we're worried about this, but the detail from
the national security advisor and the deputy, matt pottinger, who knew the chinese were lying about this. >> bob, i want to play one more piece of sound. this may affect the country more than anything else. this is how he views the republican party as a reflection of or in service of him. >> can i ask a political question? >> sure. >> and that is looking at this through the lens of a reporter who wants to look at the whole story, you've changed the republican party. you realize that? >> 95% approval rating. nobody's never been at 80 -- you know, ronald reagan was at 87. >> okay, is this a movement? >> no. that i can't tell you. i can tell you -- >> what do you think? >> it's the party of strength and common sense, of, you know -- >> who's the heir?
>> and i'll tell you what, the heir will have to be determined. that's to be determined. but as an example the republican party has always been known for disloyalty to each other. okay, they always broke up. i will say this, and this isn't a threat. because it's not a threat, but if they went against me they'd all lose their election because nobody has a base like me. >> this is happening right now. this is trump playing the primaries, putting forth candidates like herschel walker and jd vance against primary opponents who didn't participate in the moral collapse. what do you think with your long lens of history? how do you think he's changed the party? >> well, he's taken control of it in a way that it's unheard of, and i think one of the reasons to release these tapes
is to let people listen for themselves. i make judgments myself, which are severe. the question is whose interest is he president for? himself. what about the public, the american people, claire mcmullen, my assistant, listened to this many times and she found one time where in eight hours trump says -- he talks about the american people. >> bob woodward, you're cutting in and out. we're so grateful to have wood woodward here. his new audio book is called "the trump tapes, bob woodward's 20 interviews with donald trump." it's out now. we're going to get that analysis
how many times he mentions the american people. i think it was once in eight hours. we have to sneak in a quick break. we'll be back. don't go anywhere. n a quick break. we'll be back. don't go anywhere. french toast the way it's meant to be. try all three flavors. only at ihop. download the app and earn free food with every purchase.
bipolar depression. it made me feel trapped in a fog. this is art inspired by real stories of bipolar depression. i just couldn't find my way out of it. the lows of bipolar depression can take you to a dark place. latuda could make a real difference in your symptoms. latuda was proven to significantly reduce bipolar depression symptoms. and in clinical studies, had no substantial impact on weight. this is where i want to be. call your doctor about sudden behavior changes or suicidal thoughts. antidepressants can increase these in children and young adults. elderly dementia patients have increased risk of death or stroke. report fever, confusion, stiff or uncontrollable muscle movements, which may be life threatening or permanent. these aren't all the serious side effects. now i'm back where i belong. ask your doctor if latuda is right for you. pay as little as zero dollars for your first prescription.
IN COLLECTIONSMSNBC West Television Archive Television Archive News Search Service
Uploaded by TV Archive on