tv Morning Joe MSNBC January 3, 2017 3:00am-6:01am PST
before we toss it to "morning joe," we'll check on the stories you'll hear about in the day ahead. the 115th congress is set to get underway in just hours. they will vote on a speaker expected to go to paul ryan again. meanwhile presidential candidate jill stein and wisconsin chapter of green party will hold a rally for how the state votes. should only use paper ballots counted by hand or scanners. that's going to do it for me. i'm betty nguyen. now, "morning joe." >> i just think if you have a fight, a battle, you've got to do it on twitter. >> you have to respect your boss at some point. >> yeah, exactly. >> there's an element of that. >> you've got to know who the man is. you've got to know who the top dog is. you've got to know who the guy
that everybody needs to bow down and salute. that's what the twitter war was about yesterday. people not knowing their place, not knowing who to bow down to. >> didn't work out. >> worked out for the big dog. that's all i've got to say. can you believe that? >> i was surprised. >> especially given the timing. >> wow, unbelievable. >> you know, some people just aren't very smart. that's all i've got to say. i wasn't going to talk about it but we've got to talk about it. it's important. >> it is important. >> it's going to be increasingly important as we go through the month. >> it is completely important. this twitter thing. it's just sitting there, boom, it blows up. lane kiffin, like nick saban thing, what is going on here? what is going on here? mark, you know what i do. you know what i do.
what was yesterday? >> yesterday was the day -- >> monday. >> it was a holiday. >> you know what i do monday, go down to the orphanage with willie geist, we get the ladles out, pooridge, i couldn't enjoy that because of the lane kiffin thing. >> a time of adversity. >> fifth national championship in a year. but still, it would have been a nice way for lane to finish things, right? >> an odd time. >> really odd time. >> elise, i can tell you're an alabama fan. >> i'm pro nic saban, even though my brother will hate to hear that. i like the way he dress. that's the main thing. >> a choice.
>> i'm open minded. >> anyway, it's tuesday, january 3rd. mika has the morning off. she's where, my friends? >> france. >> couldn't be with us. this is really big. veteran columnist and msnbc contributor. what is he? >> legendary. >> please, let's end this. i'll end it. >> managing editor of bloomberg politics mark halperin, contributor to "time" magazine and former aide to george w. bush white house and state department, the very busy elise jordan. also for treasury secretary offial, future treasury secretary and "morning joe" economic analyst steve ratner. msnbc political correspondent kasie hunt. so i'm thinking if i'm the new republican congress, mike.
>> get out of jail card. >> making talk about obama care, make sure health care through market-driven forces. maybe we can be a check against donald trump on all these issue concerns. we can tell our people everything is going to be okay. no. what do they do, mike? >> house votes to gut ethics office right here. >> dude, dudettes, what's wrong with you. >> arrive in washington and vote your self a get out of jail card. no ethics investigations, no reporting really. >> caskasie hunt, what's going here? they put these laws in effect after mark folly y, jack abramoff, people like me, come on, you want to clean the place up. >> it was just for you. >> the joe scarborough memorial, swear to god he never comes back to washington and screws things up like he did the first time he
was here, relief act. and they gut it. why? >> it's a surprise move, just a few hours before this new congress begins, house republicans decided to put an end to their own independent ethics oversight. last night they voted to put office of congressional ethics, a watchdog created by democrats in the wake of jack abramoff, not just scarboro, under the jurisdiction of the house ethics committee. so what that does is force investigators to report to the very members they are supposed to be monitoring. >> no, no, no. >> members spoke out in favor of the decision said it would restore accntability and due process for members accused of wrongdoing. the new rules prohibit the office from considering anonymous allegations. >> why? >> because the investigation must stop if members of the ethics committee orders it to. it prohibits investigations of activity before 2011 and says it can't share information with law enforcement without the committee's approval. democrats in the upper chamber
responded. senator elizabeth warren tweeting, quote, tell us, gop, who exactly thinks the problem with washington is that we have too many rules requiring the government to act ethically. mirity leader chuck schumer tweeted, house votes to turn independent ethics office into unread complaint box. why won't gop keep their party promise to drain the swamp. that, of course, is the slogan from the trump campaign. >> i'm sorry, go on, kasie. >> i was going to say essentially they are saying we're going to officially be able to have the ethics committee but we're going to bury everything underneath it. they are essentially rendering the whole thin toothless. >> this see like a great opportunity for incoming president to show his independence, show he wan t drain the swamp and immediately start hammering them on this. this is ridiculous. the last thing -- this is what happens. time and time again a party takes control of power and here
republicans have complete power. their first act out of the gate is just complete arrogance. it's a horrific misstep. >> don't be surprised by the time we reconvene at 6:00 a.m. it's reversed. >> i know paul ryan is against it. kevin mccarthy. good for them. thumbs-up. >> there's not zero argument for this, which is to say some question about due process. i think by the time they reconvene tomorrow they will have come to their senses because the optics of it are absurd. >> why do this as your first move, not even try toover it up. they did try to cover it up. there was no debate about it. if you had a serious argument to make, you wouldn't vote in secret. you would early on talk about leading a national discussion about it. >> the first law we passed after we got elected in '94, first of all, we passed a law that made
sure that all the laws we passed applied to us as well. >> the opposite optic. >> we can't exempt ourselves from it. all laws passed against americans, we also have to live by those laws. it was great. we passed one reform after another reform. balanced budget acts. all these things we tried to do. term limits. some passed, some didn't. optics were fantastic. after first 100 days, another election again. here the very first thing they do. >> you said it's a test for president-elect. it's a test for rush limbaugh, fox news, breitbart, conservative grassroots. >> what's interesting about this beyond what you agree with, you had ryan and mccarthy against
it. how strong the leadership and other things down the pike, rank and file and leadership. >> it's going to be up to paul ryan to show he has more control over his caucus than john boehner did. at some point he's going to have to have a moment, i'm not saying this is it, where he says you're either going to follow me or you're notoing to follow me. if you're not going to follow me i'm going back to wisconsin hanging out with my family and making more money. >> as a member of congress, how much about junkets and gifts and wanting to keep it behind the scenes as much as possible. >> i think it is. it about sheer arrogance, too. everybody forgets, they really do forgot what happened two years ago and two years ago before that everybody once they get in there, they walk through the white house and think we're the first people that ever got here, smarter than anybody before. that's what congress thinks,
republican majority, permanent republican majority, screw everybody else. that's how people think. two years later nancy pelosi is speaker. again, i also use the example, mike, of karl rove in 2004 talking about a permanent republican majority. two years nancy pelosi is speaker of the house. 2008 barack obama, hope and change. this is a coalition that will change america forever. that's jt people of the press saying that. two years later the tea party comes to tn. so there's always the next election. it always comes at you too fast, and you never want to start this way. i hope you are right, mark. this needs to be reversed and paul ryan needs to take charge and say, guys, you're looking like idiots, like you have something to hide. this is not how we're supposed to start our new republican era.
>> one more outstanding commercial for term limits. >> yeah. >> you've got a huge percentage of member of congress in safe seats, they do not care. they are going to be re-elected no matter what they do, gut the ethics. what does this portend for immediate future for paul ryan's leadership. he can't get members to go along on ethics thing, what does he do when donald trump comes in with democratically tinged proposal. >> it would help if trump would hurry along his press conference letting us know how he's going to handle ethics of higher office and set an example. i do think he is giving cover -- going to give cover to everyone if he, himself, at the top isn't following the rules. >> we know he's not following the rules. >> what rules will he not follow. >> all the rules. >> what rules. >> to not have a fox interest in
things you're involved with. they are exempt -- >> therefore, i just want to be clear here, he's not going to ignore the rules. there are no rules against presidents. by the way, one of the shocking things about this transition, i never knew that was the case until trump got elected. >> apparently a constitutional thing. >> so you can't accurately say, i'm not being whatever -- >> correct me. >> we've got a story coming up. >> not following the rules applied to of everybody else that works for him. >> just like a member of connecticut, i don't follow motorcycle helmet laws of wisconsin. >> everybody that works for him following a s of rules not legally required to follow decides he's not going to follow him. >> i'm saying, let's be exact here. donald trump has no -- does not
have the same rules applied to him as president of the united states. >> a rule about taking money from foreign entities. can't do that. a big clause. so your point. >> my point is already you have a situation where the ethics and compliance rules and so forth on capitol hill are more lax than in the executive branch and now they want to make them even laxer. >> all right. talk about this, mike, new questions about continued business ties of president-elect. a new video showing president-elect donald trump speaking to new year's eve party mar-a-la mar-a-lago, shows him single out a billionaire from dubai who built trump national golf club in the country as well as other luxury properties. it is at work on building of a second golf course scheduled to open next year.
senior adviser kellyanne conway rejected any suggestion his private business is interfering with public office. >> i find that to be so completely ridiculous and specious. this man is allowed to have a new year's eve celebration with his business partners and acquaintances. the idea he's giving a speech and recognizing his friend and beautiful wife and people are going to twist that around to somehow it's a business favor, we've got to get ahold of ourselves here. i think donald trump said it best when he said if it w up to some people he would never talk to his children again. it not going to happen. not going to disentangle their business interest, the fact he's going to be 100% committed to his job as president of the united states and still have a relationship with his children. >> just following up -- >> this fascinating story, i don't know if you know this or t, i was not at the new year's
eve party. we've learned that. oh, god, what a grim way to start the new year, tweeting about it for five days. i did talk to the president-elect 15 minutes or so away from the party but i was there the night before, as i read "the washington post" and this dinner with him. this guy from dubai was very interesting. i looked around, it was a very small room. you looked around, it was the first time i sort of figured out what donald trump's social life was like, who he surrounds himself with, kind of helped me understand better the cabinet people he's picking which i haven't quite understood. no, it's just like reagan. reagan liked surrounding himself with entertainment figures, people he had grown up with, people he knew. these people were all developers. guys who had done huge projects
in dubai. guys who had done the biggest projects in las vegas. guys who had done biggest projects all over the world. before he sat down he was milling around and talking to all these people. they were talking le he was. you would have been very comfortable with it. we've got to get out of this project. can write off $300 million and move it over. i sat there. they asked me and i don't like purple. i don't know this stuff. dubai kept saying, donald, donald, we've got a deal. we can do it. we can make $2 billion. donald says i can't do it then it was funny, he said can do it but i'm not going to do it. president of the united states. >> he does understand, though, that all of these people are coming at him, like they always
have -- point something else out, too, the media really saying donald trump wasn't a real businessman. donald trump, all they do is put his name on buildings. he's just a pathetic loser, he's not worth this. suddenly afterwards all the stories blow up. actually he is an international man of mystery. he's got projects all over the globe and they are big projects. but this buy, i actually heard their interaction. this guy was bemoaning the fact trump couldn't to do a deal with them, couldn't do a deal with him because trump is out of that business, you know. >> all these people paid for the privilege of hanging out at mar-a-lago that night. i don't think reagan because throwing parties -- >> this was the night before. >> so this is the private, the members. and th the next night. so that night wasn't as developer heavy. >> waseaying he could not do a deal with him or his company
couldn't do a deal with him? >> i don't know. i think it was both. >> well, if the answer is i can't do a deal because i'm president, then he's behaving and living within the -- >> that was the joke. he said i can't do a deal. i'd love to but i can't do the deal. well, i can do the deal but i can't do the deal. >> my sense is they are headed towards when he finally does make this belated announcement, a set of guidelines how he's going to operate that will go further than skeptics worry about but not nearly far enough for people who think he can have zero relationship to the private sector. >> there is an understanding he is going to be president, from everything i've gathered around during the transition, thate's going to president of the united states, and it is the most important thing to him and he wants to do a great job, so much so he derides other people who go on vacations. he says if you've got that job, why are you not in the white house 20 hours a day working nonstop.
and so it's an understanding, i've spoken with ivanka over the past month. they basically have said they learned in the transition like, boy, wow, okay, those fast balls were coming at us quickly. they understand they are going to have to be more careful. the charity thing, ivanka did her coffee she does every year where she was going to raise $75 for st. jude's hospital. okay, if they are going to attack me for years for what i was doing for st. jude's, i guess we're really going to have to change how we're doing things. >> if that's true, and i have no reason it's not, why would he not voluntarily comply with the rules everybody else complies with. it's not hard. >> i don't think you would. >> what? >> i don't think you would. >> i read "new york times" and the amount of money steve paid for legal fees. >> i don't think i would.
i would look at what rules would make americans the most comfortable but i'm not going to take a set of rules and apply to other people and put them on me if they don't apply to me. when i say me, i think most people would look at it -- >> except i believe every president in modern history complied with the rules voluntarily. >> barack obama, i think, is one of the most ethical presidents we've ever had. how much has barack obama made writing books? answer the question. how much money has barack obama made writing books. >> $3 million. >> it's a lot more than that. $10, 11, $12 million. >> debate write them -- >> did his business before. >> i don't think there should be a problem with royalties. i think that all the uproar about the apprentice royalties, it's royalties just like a book. i don't think the problem is
with intellectual property, licensing. >> i don't care about the royalties. >> i don't care about that. it's new deals that everyone is so concerned about. >> satisfy the spirit of what he'salking about is if he dissolves the business and he's not. >> let me ask you this. if you had spent the last four decades busting your ass building hotels all over the worlds, building golf courses all over the world working 20 hours a day and then you got elected president of the united states, seems to me if you said, okay, listen, i will still -- like intellectual property with books, i'm still going to get the financial benefit from that. i don't want to see it. went off somewhere else, have somebody hold private trust, that's fine but i'm not involved in day to day operations and i'm not going to guide them and tell them what to do, seems to me would that not be legitimate or
not? >> i'll just tell you i spent a number of years busting my butt building a business on wall street. when i went into government i had to receiver every tie. even a blind trust isn't allowed. >> did you sell it? >> i basically got bought out and cashed out and so on and so forth. i had to divest. >> what would you have done if your kids had been in the business and they still wanted to work there. >> that's where i was going. for anybody if you have adult children they obviously aren't covered. why would a 30-year-old kid be covered. what he could do is simply transfer ownership of the business to his kids. that would be that. that would be fine. he doesn't want to do that. a blind trust isn't quite compliant but it would be a step. he doesn't want to do it either. >> if he transfers it to his two boys, you think that would be okay. >> that would be legal. >> i think this is such a classist argument. in america we glorify wealth so much, it's such a sacrifice to
give up wealth. i have respect over decades, what do we do when we send a young private out to war, they give up everything, they can't have conflicts. they are going to get their legs blown off and that's that. donald trump, it's painful for him but it's also painful for families he sends off to war. >> so you think he should sell all of his business. >> i think he should. >> and transfer it. >> it is a huge sacrifice but he knew he was running for leader of the free world and it's a sacrifice he's got to make. >> actually some of the things i' said here is forsake of argument. that's probably what i would do. i would want to go into the biggest job in the world and have a clear mind, this is the only thing i want to think about. >> when do you think the weight of the presidency, job of the presidency is going to sink in with him? >> it's hard to read somebody.
but i will tell you when i was having dinner with him i noticed a big difference over the last decade, more of a stillness. usually he's bouncing around, going from table to table to table. usually his mind is going like this -- he's constantly you're the greatets in the world, your book is awesome, you're greater than jesus christ. he was just there between the conversations and stories you always hear i get to ask him a couple of questions on mexico, china, as i wrote in the "washington post" yesterday. i didn't agree with all the arguments, you can tell, but this is a guy who has been briefed and who is thinking about things and is thinking about the russian policy and is thinking about what his responsibilities are going to be. i would love for him, though, as
an american to do what you sai and keep it clean so when he walks through those doors in the oval office for the first time, he's got no reason to look back in his rearview mirror. but it's up to him as you say. >> i also think waiting this long isn't great. in other words, this is important. people want to know. it gets you off to a better start. >> the only problem with that, and you will appreciate that, it is so complicated. they he so many businesses. if they worried about that we couldn't have the secretary of state thing. jarrod h-- jared is trying to untangle. jared is trying to completely be out there. >> no choice, if he wants to serve, he has to comply. >> the reason why i think it's
taken a while, he's appointed people as quickly as anybody else. they have been completely consumed -- they have been completely consumed with getting top cabinet picks. talked about the other day, getting right person for v.a. they were supposed to get toby cosgrove. there's a problem there as far as him getting out of their deal with cleveland clinic. they are desperately trying to find the right person there. that's a 24 hour a day problem as well. this is something they have obviously got to clear up. >> needs to get everybody's tax returns and what business dealings he's had in russia. >> we are never going to see his tax returns. i'll go to my grave without seeing his tax returns. >> he's got to tell us what deals he had in russia. >> not going to happen. should. >> words of alex, that does it for us this morning on "morning
joe." chris jansing picks it up at 9:00. that's alex's way of saying we've gone way too long with the segment and i should go to break. still to come, chief white house correspondent kellyanne conway will be our guest. also house majority leader kevin mccarthy in 8:00 hour. we're going to ask him what in the world was up with those bone heads who voted against him on ethics rules. you're watching "morning joe." i hope we'll be back. you think they will let us back, mike? [burke] at farmers, we've seen almost everything,
so we know how to cover almost anything. even a rodent ride-along. [dad] alright, buddy, don't forget anything! [kid] i won't, dad... [captain rod] happy tuesday morning! captain rod here. it's pretty hairy out on the interstate.traffic is literally crawling, but there is some movement on the eastside overpass. getting word of another collision. [burke] it happened. december 14th, 2015. and we covered it. talk to farmers. we know a thing or two because we've seen a thing or two. ♪ we are farmers. bum-pa-dum, bum-bum-bum-bum ♪
the president is going to continue the tradition that stretches all the way back to george washington in 1796 when he gives that fairwell address from chicago next week. looking forward to that. president obama announced his final speech before he leaves office will be tuesday january 10th at the mccormick place, the same venue of 2012 election night celebration.
the president said in an e-mail to supporters that he's just starting to write his remarks but, quote, i'm thinking about them as a chance to say thank you for this amazing journey to celebrate the ways changed the country for the better in the last eight years and offer thoughts on where we all go from here. the white house says there's a long list of accomplishments under president obama but not all democrats have robberies to celebrate after those eight years. in fact, it's been a very bleak eight years for democrats under barack obama and steve rattner has charts to explain why. this is going to be fascinating, steve, let's talk about it. >> let's look at the fact and see what's going on and compare and contrast his political record with economic record. economic side, unemployment has dropped dramatically from 7.8, over 10% early in his administration to 4.6, 81 months of job growth record. dow jones average for capitalists who happening to be
watching is 125% over his time. real gdp, that's after adjusting for inflation is up 15% during his time in office. if you turn to some other areas of his presidency. >> you would have to switch starts to do that. >> we're going to do that because i messed up. you will see he pledged to bring the troops home and he almost did. obama care, 23 million americans getting health care, record low percentage of americans without health care. even real median family income, obviously a big issue in the campaign has started to churn up and now a little ahead of where it was in real terms. >> i've got to say when lou at these numbers, obviously the democratic parties have enjoyed one of its best time periods, best eight years in modern history. those numbers are just an unqualified success. congratulations to the democrats from coast-to-coast.
>> and now let's look at how he fared politically. if you look at what happened since the president came, the number of democrats that had control of the house has dropped from 256 to 187. as you said a number of times, highest percentage of republicans since 1928. >> 1928. >> the number of democrats in the senate has gone from 58 to 46. they were actually briefly over 60 including the independents who caucused with them, a filibuster proof majority. number of governors to 16. >> that's the most devastating. that's going t impact redistricting as we move forward to 2020 which impacts the blue charts and the house. >> to that point they have lost over 900 seats state legislators. the percentage of leggers, republican has gone from 44 to
58% over the last eight years. >> which i believe, for me, mark halperin, is the most devastating number. that's just grassroots, at the base, people you know, people you talk to, people who come knock on your door. i'm curious, does anybody have a theory around this table why it has been such a brutal eight years for the democrats. people say p and gerrymandering and this and that. that doesn't explain 900 state legislative seats lost, governorships, senate lo. why? >> so much happe at state level and more with republicans in control of washington. in terms of governors, not just redistricting as democrats look to rebuild governor is the place they look, they don't have very
many of them. >> the legislators. do you have a theory? why did this happen? >> the leading theory. you're incumbent party and big on things controversial you'll have blowbacks. the party got away from developing a national brand. they became obama party not national party. a lot are popular, but they don't have a national message or national operation to recruit candidates and to put the message forward? >> elise. >> i think it's more about the economic numbers in the first presentation how that didn't necessarily correlate with change in people's lives, voters lives they felt was real and impactful. i think the gain in how much people are earning on average, i think it's been pretty stagnant since 2001. so that's what people really feel. are they making more money, living a better life. that's what hit voters this year, they were hearing about
progress. >> take that out on democratic legislators across the country. >> i do think, as i said, the overall numbers on earnings are okay. but when you parse it between the famous white working class voters, it's been pretty tough for them. i do think they have taken it out a bit on democrats. i'd also say this. there's a feel in the democratic party that the president did not do as much as he could or should have done to lead the party as well as to lead his white house. >> also on that subject, talk about health care and median income. there are a lot of middle class voters that feel left behind. there are a lot of low income voters who really benefited from the health care law. a lot of those 20 million people getting subsidies to pay for health insurance. those stories about premium increases, those are middle class people forced to buy
health insurance under president obama's law and they can't afford it because their health care premiums have gone way up and they are not getting any help from the government. i think those are a lot of the people who voice their anger this year. >> a conversation we keep having. again, all the levels. 900 state legislative seats and figure what can happen. that really is a challenge for democrats. >> it's everything everyone said ancomes down to what about me. the democratic party has forgottenbout my life. more concerned about ideology than you are about my paycheck every thursday afternoon. that hasn't changed in 15 years. >> by the way, steve's annual year end chart, something that actually always brought smiles to the tops in the middle of world war ii, they would go over there and it was so nice. may west would actually hold the charts for steve.
he would be in places like okinawa. those charts in the "new york times." going online tomorrow. so you can enjoy what the greatest generation enjoyed whileeg the world. hashtag data palooza. >> i think tweets have gotten to you. >> your tweets. >> lack of sleep actually. >> okay. >> and massive quantities of vitamin c and cocaine that our camera man is taking. not me. coming up, donald trump secret new admirer a new yorker takes a look at conservative intellectuals privately backing president-elect with a provocative piece ahead on "morning joe." taking a holiday in britain, are ya doll?
♪ don't just eat. ♪ mangia! bertolli. i'm going to the bank, to discuss a mortgage. ugh, see, you need a loan, you put on a suit, you go crawling to the bank. this is how i dress to get a mortgage. i just go to lendingtree. i calculate how much home i can afford. i get multiple offers to compare side by side. and the best part is... the banks come crawling to me. everything you need to get a better mortgage. clothing optional. lendingtree. when banks compete, you win. okay! ...awkward.
heed a political movement that was unable to stop him? good question. during the campaign trump declared hills a convert to some conservative causes while unapologetically spurning officers. if liberals were shocked to be outnumbered in swing states leading conservatives more shocked throughout the year the movement was no longer theirs if it ever had been. the result showed how sharply movements of the leaders differed from those of their putative followers. the last point one of the most overlooked points. have you people in the media, people on the professional left melting down, trying to figure out how they didn't get it, how they missed america. what did we get wrong. nobody was more blind sided by this, nobody, than the conservative intellectuals. especially you look at
evangelicals, i think a record number of evangelicals voted for a guy that you would have thought 5% would have voted for. >> absolutely. >> because they sought him -- it turned out some of the things the leaders of that movement, the evangelical movement cared about were not the same things people in that movement koird about. i think that's one of the interesting things about trump, you have this edifice, the bible, then you have a candidate who says, i'm not necessarily so interested in any of this things, the other groups of conservativ conservatives. >> planned parenthood, for instance, that's not going to go well. he won sou carolina by like 20. it was a runaway. they didn't care. >> a lot of those predictions were off. again, part of the issue was that we're used to listening to
have really smart folks in the conservative movement who this time around were not in touch with where voters were. to this article i tried to go out and find some of the smartest, most thoughtful peel i could find who weren't necessarily accepting donald trump but who were actively excited about him. >> who are these people you found? >> are quite prominent, larry arn, one of them is a guy known as desius, doesn't use his real name, blogger for journal of american greatness. this kind of really smart, halfway ironic pro trump political journal that lived and died on the internet in 2016. i sat down to docius, an
ideology a little different than what we're used to. >> seems to me, and i want your opinion on this, economic nationalism is what this group of closet trump intellectuals who still aren't ready to come out of the closet because they are worried about repercussions of their job. you consider polling people didn't want to say they were voting for trump, these intellectuals have the same problem. do you think economic nationalism is what motivates this group of trump intellectuals. >> steve bannon used called himself economic nationalist. a lot talked about we've got to rethink this republican commitment to the free market, what one of them calls free mark. got to rethink trade deals, rethink immigration. we have to rethink wars in florida, occupation. more generally there's a sense that it's legitimate, they think, for the government to act on behalf of american citizens and the interests of american citizens even if that means
violating some principles of conservative orthodox. >> how do they deal with schizophrenia on foreign policy, unpopular wars, come home, americ first, at the same time talk about aggressive muscular foreign policy dealing with isis. >> again, when i talked to decius he made a sharp distinction about wars of foreign occupation of the idea was kind of a jacksonian foreign policy, the idea the government going to ask muscularly defending american citizens, going after isis but wouldn't necessarily mean sending troops into syria, for example. it would mean trying to make peace with russia obviously but saying tough things to china when it doss trade. that's the idea. again, we have no idea how this is going to work out in practice. one of the strange things about donald trump he's not going to brag about all the books on political philosophy. he's not necessarily listening
to these intellectuals i talked to. >> thank you very much for being with us. greatly appreciate you being here. your piece can be read in the new yorker. straight ahead "washington post" eugene robinson joining the table. gene writing, "trump's america is not the only real america." and he'll explain that straight ahead. we our noses are similarings that we have in common. and our cheeks. people say we sit the same way. (laughter) i decided to go on ancestry to get my dna tested
so i could find out more about my heritage. and i also found that i had a sister that i didn't know about because i'm adopted. that was me. it was really exciting to find myself in someone else. discover the story only your dna can tell. order your kit now at ancestrydna.com what are you doing? getting your quarter back. fountains don't earn interest, david. you know i work at ally. i was being romantic. you know what i find romantic?
a robust annual percentage yield that's what i find romantic. this is literally throwing your money away. i think it's over there. that way? yeah, a little further up. what year was that quarter? what year is that one? '98 that's the one. you got it! nothing stops us from doing right by our customers. ally. do it right. let's get out of that water. ally. do it right. hey there, starting your search for the ri am!used car? you got it. just say show me millions of used cars for sale at the all new carfax.com. but, i don' want one that's had a bunch of owners just say, show me cars with only one owner pretty cool it's perfect. that's the power of carfax® find the cars you want, avoid the ones you don't plus you get a free carfax® report with every listing start your used car search at carfax.com i have age-related maculare degeneration, amd, he told me to look at this grid every day. and we came up with a plan to help reduce my risk of progression, including preservision areds 2.
dresser up enough to let his twin brother escape. the boys are now fine and the dresser is now securely faassted to the wall. the boys' mother debated whether to release the video but decided to share it in the interest of safety. >> look at that 2-year-old boy. good boy. wow. >> that's tough to watch, the beginning of it. >> that is tough. that is tough to watch. >> a strong kid. >> yeah, you parents, you kind of with dressers and kids, especially boys -- get wires, put them into the wall, make it so you can't pull it away from the wall. >> you're going to have to change. you have dressers and put
biology balls. >> axe collection. >> second door down and nothing blochlt no, you don't do that. >> put the balls in the locker. >> happened to your boy. >> nick and colin. >> last week. >> same thing. >> your boys, one probably did it to the other. >> they are like heckle and jekyll. >> they are. coming up in a few hours, 115th congress is going to be sworn in. it's a ceremony joe biden has simply enjoyed overseeing. a breakdown what to expect from the new congress straight ahead and see what joe has planned. ♪ ♪ after becoming one of the largest broadband companies in the country. after expanding our fiber network coast to coast. these are the places we call home. we are centurylink. we believe in the power of the digital world.
the power to connect. and that's what drives us everyday. ...another anti-wrinkle cream in no hurry to make anything happen. neutrogena® rapid wrinkle repair works... ...in one week. with the... fastest retinol formula available. it's clinically proven to work on fine lines and... ...even deep wrinkles. "one week? that definitely works!" rapid wrinklrepair. and for dark spots, rapid tone repair. neutrogena®. "see what's possible." so if ydead battery,t tire, need a tow or lock your keys in the car, geico's emergency roadside assistance is there 24/7. oh dear, i got a flat tire. hmmm. uh... yeah, can you find a take where it's a bit more dramatic on that last line, yeah? yeah i got it right here. someone help me!!! i have a flat tire!!!
thank you so much. >> you know how it works, joe? >> i do. are you kidding me? >> that is the best guy in the united states senate right here. i can say that now. >> joe biden administering the oath of office to new senators last year. he's going to do it today for the first time. welcome back to "morning joe." tuesday january 3rd. where is mika, guys. >> south of france. >> i didn't say mika, they did. >> with us is mike barnicle.
>> stop it. >> managing editor of bloomberg politics mark halperin, former treasury secretary steve rattner, msnbc political correspondent kasie hunt and joining the conversation pulitzer prize winning columnist and associate editor of "washington post" eugene washington. thank you for being here. tell us about joe biden. the last time he does this. you're friends with the guy. tell usut joe, the joe you know a how he's feeling as this winds down. >> joe biden is a gift to the nation. he has brought nothing but humor, pathos, emotion humor to every day of his job. has he respect to the institutions he has served. he loves this country.
i think people will miss joe biden as vice president. he's been a wonderful partner to barack obama. as steve's charts point out the democratic party had failings over the last eight years. i think largely because the president hasn't invested enough political energy for democrats around the country but joe biden has always been there. >> what do you think, gene? >> he's joe biden. he loves the senate, process, he loves the whole thing. he'll have a good time. he'll have choice words, whatever they are, because joe biden always has choice words. >> joe as the vice president is also a guy that really should be involved in helping democrats find themselves again. in joe biden you have a guy, mark halperin, we said before, came to us during democratic convention when everybody was
pretty excited and high about democrats chances saying democrats had lost white working class voters like those in scranton, pennsylvania, who voted for him, the backbone of his support and was very concerned several weeks out hillary clinton would lose because of that he'll be a great guy to help democrats put together a winning coalition again. >> the future of the democratic party belongs to younger people. joe biden, john kerry, barack obama, three people fascinating. clintons, no one expects them to play anything like the role they played for a quarter century shaping future of democratic party. joe biden is as well positioned as anyone based on his pedigree and field of politics to try to figure this thing out now. >> eugene? >> i was just going to say, there will be a lot of gnashing of teeth and pulling of hair.
ing there be overreaction to democrat prevails just as we overreacted when the republicans failed. they will never be back. they are finished. these parties are resilient and they come back. historically barack obama leaves the congress, republican hands, george w. bush left in democratic hands. >> it does. >> it's hard to recall a time when the president's party saw a president leave office with the opinion that, boy, he's been great for the party. he's been great building. when did that happen? >> you think democrats critical of barack obama are being unfair? >> well, look, they are saying what they have to say from their position. what they say is a president who didn't spend a whole lot of time cultivating the fields of the democratic party.
hower, that's what presidents do or don do. >> didn't happen with reagan and clinton. >> but the point mark made in the last hour that we didn't spend enough time on, one of the big problems democrats have is the bench. there are really good people in the senate and house, a few governors, not that many, frankly, who are eligible or possible candidates in 2020. but as i talk to my democratic activist friends, okay, who is out there. who do we really want to try to cultivate or bring along, it's a very short list. >> it really is. today, speaking of congress, 115th congress, going to get sworn in. the gop is going to enjoy a 47 vote margin in the house. 241 republicans to 194 democrats. there are 52 new members. that includes 27 republicans coming in for the first time and 25 democrats. now, over in the senate, there are going to be 2 republicans to 48 democrats in the senate caucus with incoming vice
president mike pence there to break any ties. i suspect there will be some ties over the next two years. for the first time in u.s. history, a majority of incoming members to the united states senate are women. we have four female senators and three men. the total number of women will reach an all time high of 21. 21 women who are u.s. senators. 16 are democrats and 5 are republicans. let's stop right there. what a difference. >> a huge difference. >> huge difference. >> that's amazing. >> wasn't too long ago -- >> margaret smith. >> wow. the only new face in leadership this year senate majority leader chuck schumer of new york wants to work with president-elect trump. some of schumer's caucus motivated to work with the as
well. up in 2018 from states that trump won. meanwhile the "new york post" quoting an anonymous source that said trump told schumer he likes him more than mitch mcconnell because the gop leaders both want to lose. and we have been speculating that, saying as much only show, that he is. he's a new yorker. >> he's a new yorker. >> he's contributed to chuck schumer. he's talked to chuck schumer. he's known chuck schumer. he's bumped into chuck schumer over the past 30 years. he knows chuck schumer. there's not this huge cultural divide with him, mark, that there is with paul ryan or mitch mcconnell who might as well be from another planet than donald trump. >> you can argue if you look at trump's agenda and vision that really transforming the country is going to be more possible if he can get chuck schumer on
board than if he gets republicans on board. transforming the country means passing things with bipartisan support. obviously that's going to require chuck schumer to go along with him on some things >> infrastructure fights are fascinating. >> two, schumer is gettable. it makes a world of difference transforming the cub. >> a surprise that happened just hours before the new congress started, house republicans decided to put an end to their independence ethics oversight. that's right. the first move of the 115th congress by the republican majority in the house was to vote in closed door session to wipe out ethics guidelines. last night they voted to put office of congressional ethics, watchdog created by democrats in wake of jack abramoff bribery scandal under jurisdiction of the house ethics committee.
that move they are now forced investigators to report to the very members who are actually under investigation. talk about the foxes guarding the henhouse. the members who spoke out in favor of the decision said restore accountability due process accused of wrongdoing. the new rules prohibit the office from considering anonymous allegations. so somebody basically can't report on their boss now without the fear of being fired. an investigation has to stop if members order it to, activity before 2011. it says it can't share information with law enforcement without the committee's approval. kasie hunt, this just seems remarkly bon headed to everybody around the table, a terrible way to start. but there also seems to be a divide between the house leadership and the rank and file who voted to kill these ethics
reforms. >> yeah. my reporting is that paul ryan and kevin mccarthy both spoke out against this in this closed door session. of course, they didn't ultimately -- they wn able to do anything about it. what this effectively does is make sure we are likely to never learn about a lot of these scandals. the only reason we know some of the names, you remember bill jefferson, the congressman from louisiana who had money stashed in his freezer, the scandals around that we only know about these things because there was this independent office that essentially gathered up independent complaints, when it was from the news media or anonymous tipster, another member of congress gathered them up and investigated them. that power is essentially now going away. i think you're right, we were talking earlier, i wouldn't be surprised if the backlash on this changes things a little bit. this is also not the only area they are talking about dealing with influence in a different way. there's baseball discussion also about getting rid or putting back, excuse me, earmarks.
that's something paul ryan has also said he doesn't want to do but his caucus is pressuring him for. >> julie pace, what does all this say, if anything, what does it portend for leer possibilities of keb mccarthy and paul ryan going forward given the fact they can't get membership to go along with ethics thing. >> is fascinating republican leaders say we oppose this and voted for it anyway. if you're donald trump you're saying, okay, maybe paul ryan and kevin mccarthy won't always have the pull they claim they do. i actually think this could be an interesting moment for trump. you have such pushback from so many circles, it will be interesting to hear what the president-elect has to say about this move. >> how does this happen? speaker of the house opposes it, majority leader opposes it and still it's going to happen? joe, how does that happen in the
house of representatives. claiming credit. >> right. >> i can tell you this, newt gingrich had many failings as a leader. he was disorganized. as one of his close friends said to him before he was run out of town, newt, you can tell us what's going to happen in the year 2125, you just have no idea what's going on in your house for next week. this is the sort of thing, though, that newt gingrich would never allow to happen. he would stand up and say, you're being stupid. you really want your first headline of the new congress to be that you are stripping ethics laws? i will say this again, again, i've had problems with gingrich's leadership. he would never have allowed that. >> nancy pelosi would never allow -- >> paul ryan has to step up and say this -- >> communications director. how can there not be a member of the house communications staff that says, guys, ladies --
>> i'm sure there was. >> they disregarded. >> you think ryan and mccarthy didn't do that, stand up and pound the table and say, guys, this is insane or do you think they did it and nobody listened to them. >> there's different ways to do it. guys, this is a really bad idea. guys, we're not going to do this. if you don't like it, i'll tell you what, kick me out on the eve of us being sworn in. i'm going to go back to wisconsin. can you skplab how you kicked me out because you wanted to be corrupt. i'm going to be upstairs having some lemonade. let me know what you think. he could have done it. they would have backed up. he needs to do it. this the worst way to start a new congress. >> absolutely. >> kasie and julie, kasie, you first. what do we know about what happened behind closed doors? did anybody say, hey, morons, do not do this. >> we do know paul ryan and
kevin mccarthy spoke out again this. the argument is what you're saying, this is not the way to start things off, the focus should be elsewhere. we don't yet have a good sense if there was anybody really expressing true outrage here. this was a vote in the rules committee that is supposed to be on the house floor later today. so the whole house is going to have to vote on this. we'll see if anybody takes the opportunity to speak up and maybe make a little bit louder noise thatan actually be heard by the public. >> so the whole house has to vote on this. so all the democrats will vote against it. >> right. >> now it's up to paul ryan to get -- how many republicans does he need? >> 20, 25. >> 25. >> that's why when we reconvene tomorrow at 6:00 a.m. >> paul ryan needs to get 25. he needs to be very vocal about it. he needs to be on the floor. he needs to say this the official position of the speaker's office and go after it and win this and crush the
people that have done this, that have hurt the party and send a message to them. >> first get the votes and the people that move to do this. >> you'll see a lot of greens -- >> just do the actual wording of these documents and the impact of it. i don't know all the details of it, but we don't need to know all the details of it to know this is a bad way to start it. if this does deprive somebody of due process, hold hearings. have press conferences. explain to us. don't go behind a closed door, vote, and then throw this to people the night before you get sworn in, 115th congress that could be a historic congress for this republican house. >> julie pace, what are the proponents of this legislation that passed behind closed doors yesterday? what did they say? why did they do it?
why was it needed? >> they are trying to claim this congressional eics mo.office of find what elements of this rule would aually make that happen. maybe we'll ar some surprises today on it. part of the problem is this happened bind closed doors and republicans for eight years have railed against obama and democrats doing health care and other measures behind closed doors. part of the problem is that when you do that, you don't have have a full accounting of what the decision making was. who was standing up in favor, who was standing up against. so republicans are running into the same trap that they raled against democrats for under obama. >> best way to drain the swamp is you lure the gators into the swamp. got 'em. >> exactly. put them all in there. drop some dynamite. >> the whole thing, one stick of
dynamite. >> pull them in. that's the way to do it. that is something. julie pace, thank you so much. in our next hour we're going to speak live to house majority leader kevin mccarthy. he was one of those republican leaders who opposed the rule change. also this hour we have incoming white house counselor to the president kellyanne conway. she's going to join the conversation. you're watching "morning joe." come back, please, we miss you already. it's beautiful. was it a hard place to get to? (laughs) it wasn't too bad. with the chase mobile app, jimmy chin can master depositing his hard earned checks in a snap. easy to use chase technology for whatever you're trying to master.
it's feeling up thinking up living up. it's being in motion... in body in spirit in the now. boost. it's not just nutrition. it's intelligent nutrition. with 26 vitamins and minerals and 10 grams of protein. all in 3 delicious flavors. it's choosing to go in one direction... up. boost. be up for it. i provide for my family. i will use my education to help my cmunity. i will inspire our next generation of leaders. i am a college student, but i am only 1%. only 1% of college students are american indian. donate now, and help our numbers grow. ♪
>> isn't that great? isn't that great? >> that's wonderful. >> some great lines. >> churchill. >> like the woman who went up to him and said prime minister you're drunk. >> you're ugly. but tomorrow morning i'll no longer be drunk. you'll still be ugly. >> crown resulted in churchill revival, i think. >> i think so. then there was the other
comeback i think to the same lady in society who said, sir, if i were your wife, i would give you poison. he said if i was your wife, i would drink it. but we tell the story that i read in horace johnson's book, the thesis of the book is one man, one woman, one person change the world. churchill did it, saved safelisation. we live in the world we live in today because of what winston churchill did in 1940. another great story we told during the break, but we can't. all i can say as a punch line is god makes one proud to be british. nbc correspondent hallie jackson with us. hallie, so nice for you to be there in front of the building that looks like st. paul's. president obama is set to head
to the hill tomorrow and meet with democrats to talk about how to protect obama care but he's not the only high-profile visitors that's going to be meeting with lawmakers. it's going to be quite a battle for obama care. >> the president will be here tomorrow, so will vice president lake-effect mike pence, huddling with democrats to talk about how to save affordable care act mike pence talk with house republicans to talk about how to dismantle and repeal it as quickly as possible. that's the explicit stated number one priority for leaders on capitol hill. you can expect to see them move quickly on that. the big question is, going to appeal affordable care act, democrats pointing to millions they say could lose coverage, what are you going to replace it with. that will be led by tom price, if he ends up getting confirmed, all signs point to he will, incoming health and human services secretary along with
republicans on the hill. a couple of things it's going to take a long te to put in pla policies popular parts of the law, inability to deny coverage to those with prepistons conditions. ability to allow kids under age of 26 to stay on their parents health care. those are pieces people like that even donald trump says he wants to try and keep in whatever is going to end up replacing affordable care act. the question is how do you pay for it. that is what republicans are going to have to grapple with. i think it's interesting, kellyanne conway was just over on our sister network on the "today" so talking about how health care and veterans care are two issues donald trump hears the most about from constituents, clearly a priority of the president-elect. he ran obviously on appealing obama care as did all the republicans who ran. democrats are going to try to fight it. they just at this point don't have the votes for it. you're going to see the president coming to try to save this signature domestic policy, this legacy plan, but the question is can he at all be
successful. most people think it's when not if. >> hallie, giving the thinning out of the democratic party in the house specifically, what are the elements -- the defensive elements president obama is going to rely on in talking to democrats about buck it up and stand with me. >> right. so i think there's a couple of ways you might see that happen. number one is procedural, trying to figure out if i way if they can to gum up the works. that is obviously a very long shot given what you pointed out, thinning out of democrats as you put it. you're going to see a lot of discussion, you're already seeing it, a, the people who will lose coverage. b, popular parts of the law. trying to do a pr offensive to the american people to get mostly fair these republicans in districts where maybe more democratic leading constituents or constituents who favor affordable care act or who benefited from it. you might see that full court messaging press, if you will to try to put pressure on republicans to not completely
gut the law. >> all right. nbc's hallie jackson, thank you so much. on other news, president-elect trump is speaking out about north korea leaders claims the country is in the, quote, final stages of preparation for a test launch of an intercontinental ballistic missile. in a tweet trump says, "north korea just stated that it is in the final stages of developing a nuclear weapon capable of reaching parts of the u.s. it won't happen. trump followed that up a short time later chiding china not cracking down on north korea's weapon development. china taking money and wealth from the united states in totally one-sided trade but it won't help with north korea. nice. gene, this has been the problem with north korea. if north korea worked right next to china, chances are good george w. bush would have gone there in 2003 instead of iraq.
or barack obama might have gone there. or somebody else might have gone there. but we just -- we've never been able to do that because obviously we're in china's backyard. but they have got to do something. >> two factors there. yes, they are in china's backyard. china does not want the north korean regime to fall apart catastrophically for a number of reasons. influx of refugees, don't want this, don't want that. the other reason is north korea has nukes, you know. so when you talk about going in to a country that we know has nuclear weapons, it may not work well but they work well enough. so it's not just the closest of china but the closest of seoul and tokyo that any president has to worry about. >> what are we going to do? this is the sort of thing we can't sit back because 40 years from now everybody says by the
time donald trump leaves office, you are going to have a madman with the ability to exterminate everybody that lives in seattle, portland, san francisco. >> i've got a lot of ideas about a lot of things but i don't know how to solve north korea. the problem is nobody knows how to solve north korea. it's a really difficult problem. obviously yes, china has to play a role because china is the only large responsible nation. it is a sensible nation, if not crazy, that has influence there. but again, how much influence? they are wary of pushing him in the wrong direction. >> what we can't do is what happened at this table over the last five years, bring them in and talk about syria, it's too tough. no good options. if we do knowing a madman will be able to kill everybody in seattle with the push of a button, so we have to do something. the question is what do we have
to do. >> i agree with gene, it's a tough one. i agree with gene the idea of a military option is potentially explosive and i don't mean that as a joke. i think china is a key player here. because china, as gene said, doesn't want north korea to have nukes any more than we do. north korea can reach china now with nukes. we've got to pressure china to pressure north korea to get to a better place. i think that's the only path forward i can think of. >> mark. >> you can try more sanctions, try to negotiate with them. >> doesn't work. >> military first strike, there are no good options. what's clear is all the north korean regime has left is development of ballistic missiles. it becomes harder and harder. china, doesn't want the refugee problem but also still do too much to prop it up. >> well, you're right. the thing is we have no option. we're going to have to figure how to disarm them. we've been trying since 1994.
bill clinton sent jimmy carter over. that was supposed to be a grand deal. it ended up being a deal that allowed them to develop nuclear weapons. so this is one. >> you talk about sanctions. millions of people starve to death in north korea and they didn't blink an eye. >> a coup. >> i think -- >> what would you do? >> actually we're going to have to talk to china, and we're going to have to say you have things important, taiwan. that's not a reason trump didn't tweet them on taiwan already. trade is important. let me tell you, what's important taos is making sure seattle can't be nuked by that madman. we're going to have to sit down. whatever we do, we're going to have to do it in unison with china. >> that's right. >> china is going to have to know. we're going to have to put them in a position where they know.
they have no other choice. give them the choice. >> do you want to go into north korea with us, or do you want us to go in alone on your border? because we don't want to go alone by your border any more than you want us to go. so let's sit down here and figure it out. that's what donald trump and that's what rex tillerson and that's what the trump administration is going to have to start doing right now because we don't have time to wring our hands like we wrung our hands over syria for five years. >> combined threat to china and the region and the larger world will result in north korea having their nuclear capability stripped from them in the next three years. >> who. >> who on the trump team really has the expertise and knowledge of this to come up with the right policy? >> well, the trump team is talking to bob gates all the time. bob gates and rex tillerson are
good friends. i suspect if you're going to do something whether seattle continues to exist as a city or not, they are going to bring in the best they can bring in and bring in the smartest people, again, like bob gates. that is the one thing we know from this trump transition. they are bringing in smart, talented experts like bob gates. they need to bring in a lot of people, sit around the table and talk about options and they don't need to wait until 2018. >> 20 million people in seoul would like not to be incinerated. that's a problem. >> all right. in our next hour, ian bremmer joins us with risks for the new year. i wonder if north korea is number one, counting down the hits with ian. up next kellyanne conway joins the table. your insurance company won't replace
the full value of your totaled new car. the guy says, "you picked the wrong insurance plan." no, i picked the wrong insurance company. with new car replacement™, we'll replace the full value of your car plus depreciation. liberty mutual insurance. i use what's already inside me to reach my goals. so i liked when my doctor told me i may reach my blood sugar and a1c goals by activating what's within me
with once-weekly trulicity. trulicity is not insulin. it helps activate my body to do what it's supposed to do release its own insulin. trulicity responds when my blood sugar rises. i take it once a week, and it works 24/7. it comes in an easy-to-use pen and i may even lose a little weight. trulicity is a once-weekly injectable prescription medicine to improve blood sugar in adults with type 2 diabetes when used with diet and exercise. trulicity is not insulin. it should not be the first medicine to treat diabetes or for people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. do not take trulicity if you or a family member has had medullary thyroid cancer, if you've had multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if you are allergic to trulicity. stop trulicity and call your doctor right away if you have symptoms such as itching, rash, or trouble breathing; a lump or swelling in your neck; or severe pain in your stomach area. serious side effects may include pancreatitis, which can be fatal.
taking trulicity with a sulfonylurea or insulin increases your risk for low blood sugar. common side effects include nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, decreased appetite and indigestion. some side effects can lead to dehydration, which may make existing kidney problems worse. with trulicity, i click to activate what's within me. if you want help improving your a1c and blood sugar numbers with a non-insulin option click to activate your within. ask your doctor about once-weekly trulicity.
think, as we do, with donald trump's effort to drain the swamp? >> it depends what happens in the office. the full house will vote today. that was just a committee, a blind vote. but i don't want your viewers to be left with the impression there's no mechanism for ethics complaints, particularly that come from constituents, which the former office has been entertaining. this was in reaction to a 2008 scandal. there have been about 100 or so complaints since. only a third of which have been referred to the house in this committee. i think one thing they are trying to curb is the abuse of the process that has led to some of the -- those being investigated, either house members or their staffers and witnesses. some of them have complained they have been denied or had their due process rights compromised. so a more fair process, you can't have -- if this actually passes in full, joe, you could not have an anonymous tip anymore. if you want to come forward as constituent you can do that but you have to show evidence, some
grounding. >> an anonymous tip coming in. what if your staff member and you know something and you're afraid of retribution, anonymous tip. you can also put evidence in front of them, documents without having your name put out there and getting fired. >> house ethics committee which would oversee this new organization, they have many mechanism in place you can effectuate the type of hypothetical you're putting forth. i don't want people to feel like ethics is gone. there are many ways for constituents particularly to make their voices -- >> let's talk about timing. why do it no why have it the first thing for incoming -- >> i think caught some people by surprise because it was done with a blind ballot. the full house will vote today. democrats and others that object will be heard. >> are you hear today saying president-elect approves of what
the house republicans did? >> no. i haven't discussed this with him. >> you don't know his -- you sound like you're favorable toward it. >> i didn't say that. joe asked me the question is it inconsistent with draining the swamp. i'm trying to explain based on what i know and read and reporting to reporters around the table why this happened. of course the leadership opposed it as well. >> leadership opposed it because it does weaken that sort of scrutiny that frankly congress ought to have to me, and paul ryan opposed it and kevin mccarthy opposed it. it would be great to know what the president-elect thinks about it, because he says he's going to drain the swamp. so is this draining the swamp? turn out the lights and let us do whatever we want to do? >> i don't think that would be the effect in fairness. >> no anonymous tips, no public statements, nothing.
>> you're saying you're personally not taking a position on it, you don't know what the president-elect's position is, but is this a good start for the new house? >> i think a great start is tomorrow when vice president lake-effe elect pence. >> we had a great start this week. this is the first time in nine years you have republicans having the house and the senate and of course the white house now. it's a very exciting time. these folks have a mandate from the public to repeal and replace obama care. president obama was located in 2008, then elections after, that the only time democrats won after that was in 2012 because republicans weren't really able to talk about repealing and replacing obama care as much in 2012. 2010, '12, this year, 2016, obama care was on the llot. people want it repealed and replaced. they want better ac. they want to purchase health
care across state lines. they certainly want to block medicaid to the states, health savings account, you have a health insurance policy with your name on it, control the spending. >> just to complete the discussion. that will be the second thing they do. the first thing they did was getting rid of ethics. >> paul ryan and kevin mccarthy on the show later tell the 40 or 50 people that voted against this first time we need you on the house floor. we're going to roll the people and teach them a lesson. they need to listen to their speaker and follow their speaker. >> it's democracy and transparency. >> let's talk about really quickly obama care. i understand paul ryan and the house want to get rid of obama care and worry about what they replace it with down the road. the president-elect has said, no, we want to replace it. has to be a mechanism in place
right when we appeal it so we don't go two days with people off of health insurance. is that still where he is, there must be a replace mechanism there when they repeal. >> that's the ideal situation. let's see what happens practically. some experts say it could take years to complete the process. there's no question there will be different health insurance in the country under president trump. he's got his vice president elect starting tomorrow interestingly at a time when president obama is meeting with house democrats. >> if americans have hillary clinton -- have health care today under affordable care act, sounds like donald trump is saying they will have health care under whatever replaces it. >> that's correct. we don't want anyone w has insurance to not have insurance. we're aware public likes coverage for pre-existing conditions. there are some pieces of merit in the current plan. what happens is you have women,
particularly chief health care offices, two out of three dollars controlled by women, disproportionately consumer but also disproportionately providers of health care. so the concern across the board is what do we do about all the people who said i liked my health insurance before and you didn't tell me my premiums were going to go up 116% in arizona, 153% in arizona, fewer choices, lower quality, less access. then you have this whole raft of people in the country relying on affordable care act to give them coverage. instead what happened to them is they now have two jobs 25, 26 hours apiece and no health care benefits. >> but again do you or do you not have a replacement plan ready to go, ramped up ready to go say tomorrow. >> we have pieces of it that we need -- >> what is it. >> we don't have the secretary confirmed yet. as minority leader schumer if we are going to give him a fair
hearing, meet with him. we're ready to go. we're not the only party, certainly majority party. we need some help and we need assistance by the democrats to at least be fair and have meetings and of course timely and fair. >> you're asking to be as fair as republicans were. >> very fair. excuse me, president obama had seven of his cabinet members confirmed on january 20, 2009, his inauguration day. are you going to guarantee me the same courtesy? doesn't sound that way if you read the hill and "washington post," then five more that week. president bush had nine his first week. he had state and defense and ag and commerce and education and energy and treasury. are we going to have that? it doesn't seem that way. >> let's go to kasie hunt in washington. she's got a question. >> kellyanne, i want to ask you about this information that mr. trump has said he has about what happened with the russians and the election. he says he knows things other people don't know.
are these things that the intelligence community doesn't know, in his view, or how would you characterize the information he says he has? >> every president, in this case president-elect knows things the rest of us don't and should. >> from who? intelligence community? he needs this assessment? where is he learning this information. >> either all types of briefings. he's going to be president of the united states in 17 days. he receives briefings. he has any number of intelligence briefings on any given day. and as your viewers should know, kasie, the president-elect has agreed to receive a top level intelligence briefing from our top intelligence officials in this country here in new york, specifically on this allegation of russian hacking. >> when is that going to be? >> could be today. early this week. >> okay, great. all right, kellyanne, thank you so much. >> thanks for having me. >> we greatly appreciate you being here. coming up next, no oppenheim
film "jackie" critical acclaim, major screen play, a lot of early oscar buzz. we're going to find out where that achievement stacks up in his career compared to his first job as executive producer of "scarborou"scarborough country." noah joins us straight ahead. "scarborough country."" noah joins us straight ahead. noah joins us straight ahead. just like the people who own them, every business is different. but every one of those businesses
will need legal help as they age and grow. whether it be help starting your business, vendor contracts or employment agreements. legalzoom's network of attorneys can help you every step of the way so you can focus on what you do. we'll handle the legal stuff that comes up along the way. legalzoom. legal help is here.
all on the go. you can even download from your x1 dvr and watch it offline. only xfinity gives you more to stream to any screen. download the xfinity tv app today. people won't stop asking until they do. >> if i don't, they can interpret my silence however they want. my lips are drawn. she holds back her tears but she can't hide her anger. >> most writers want to be famous. >> you want to be famous? >> no. i'm fine as i am, thank you. >> you should prepare your self. this article will bring you a great deal of attention. >> ithat se, any advice for me? >> yes. don't marry the president.
are you afraid i'm about to cry? >> no, i'd say you're more likely to scream. >> scream what? >> my was a great man. >> wow. that was a clip from the new movie "jackie," that was powerful, mike. it wasn't quite as powerful as what noah put together for scarborough country when we did "hollyweird." but "hollyweird" was really powerful. that was his best work, but he's doing all right. he's got a daytime job. he's doing all right. >> what noah has done -- >> this is really awkward. >> this is the screenwriter, also vice president of nbc news, executive in charge of the "today." so go ahead. >> to reveal to a larger public all these years later the fact that jackie kennedy was the
architect of camelot, she created camelot, this lasting image across the decades that was clearly known to a few people at its origins, but has been lost in time and now it's bac back. >> he actually liked to listen to camelot at night? >> who knows. she said she did. >> you created this in a burst of energy six, seven years ago. >> i did. >> an easy script for you to write. talk about the process. >> i've been obsessed with the kennedys and jackie my whole life. >> why? >> my mother was really interested in her. she saved all the newspapers and magazines from that period. when i was a little kid at my grandmother's house, i would go through the boxes of fraying newspapers and articles and i was struck by the image of jackie in the black veil, marching at the head of that funeral procession. >> and in recent years, we've learned that she really, really
went through a horrific time, understandably, but sort of lost control for a while after -- >> i think now we would say she was suffering from ptsd. if you think about it in the most viscel human terms, her husband was murdered right next to her and she was showered in his blood. >> yeah. >> so for her to have to come home from dallas and shepherd two young kids through the tragedy of losing their father, plan this state funeral with the eyes of the entire world watching her, vacate the home that she lived in, and at the same time, to have the presence of mind and the sort of mastery of political stagecraft to recognize that she had to model that funeral after lincoln's or she chose to do so in order to associate her husband with lincoln's greatness and that she then summoned this reporter, just days after her husband's death, and essentially dictated this camelot mythology to him. the presence of mind that that took, given what she was going through, this woman's strength -- >> it's fascinating. >> it's amazing. >> evan thomas talked about the second after bobby found out that his father had been -- his
son -- his brother had been assassinated, he immediately clicked to th white house and said, get these documents to this safe. just like jackie, they immediately were still in service of the president even in this horrifying moment and built the legacy from the beginning. >> it's an important reminder that the behavior of our public officials at these moments of national crisis, and you never know when they're going to come or in what form they're going to take, but the choices that individuals make have auge impact on history. and, you know, the terror, the confusion, the fear. people didn't know oswald was a crazy lone gunman. they didn't know what was happening. it could have been a coup. and her choices helped the country get through this. >> this is just such an important movie, i think, because it shows what an asset jackie kennedy was to john f. kennedy. and not just the myth making and
the legacy, but what do you think about the role that she plaid during his actual presidency? >> i mean, i think -- you know, a critical one. she -- people -- they talk about the impact that television has had on american politics, people reference the kennedy/nixon debates as being that kind of first moment where tv helped sway political opinion in a big way. but jackie's white house tour, the televised special that she did, where she brought cbs television cameras into the white house and talked about american history, talked about the history of the white house and her restoration of it, and the importance of reference for american constitutions, for the people who had lived there before her, these are things that helped shape how the public perceived her husband and their administration during the time that they were in office. i think she was always acutely aware, i think she had an intuitive sense, an intuitive genius when it came to political stagecraft that was asset to her husband throughout his time in office. >> actually helped her husband when he visited france and de
gaulle, obviously had problems, and de gaulle and as well as the french were wowed by jackie. the first thing he said when he stood up, i'm the man who escorted jackie kennedy to paris. >> your mayor quimby impersonation. >> that's a great mayor quimby imitation. >> what is the essence of jackie kennedy? >> i think the essence of it is that there's no one jackie kennedy. she like every person had many facets to her personality. i think that the idea that we present different faces to the world, depending on who we' interacting with is true across the board, but even more so for people in the public eye. and when you see her interact with her children in this film, with her old friend and aide, nancy tuckerman, with a priest, with bobby, with lyndon johnson's aides, you see a different jackie in all those environments and in all of those situations. and i think he wanted to kind of put together that collage and say that somewhere in that is the essence of this woman. but i think it's unfair to
anyone to say, this is the one definitive version. >> we've got to go. my ep alex is saying that, but sometimes there's always one more question. my one last question -- sorry, alex, my last question is, how long was she suffering from this posttraumatic stress disorder? when did she come out of the cloud? >> you could argue that her marriage to onassuss, everything was driven by it in some indirect way. thanks for being with us. >> thanks for having me. >> next time we come on the show, i'll tell people what your first job actually was, which was far more interesting. still ahead, a new congress convenes today and while republicans have several top priorities, including repealing obamacare and confirming cabinet positions, it seems they've already made their first move and what a smart move it is, if you don't want to get re-elected two years from now. gutting an independent ethics office.
we're going to talk about that and much more, when kevith kevi mccarthy, straight ahead. thanks to st. jude children's research hospital. at st. jude, no family ever pays for treatments, travel, housing or food... because all a family should worry about is helping their child live. wanna play? yes i do. give thanks for the healthy kids in your life and give to those who are not. donate now at stjude.org or shop where you see the st. jude logo. why can't i be a shark?
and my life is basketball.west, but that doesn't stop my afib from leaving me at a higher risk of stroke. that'd be devastating. i took warfarin for over 15 years. until i learned more about once-daily xarelto®... a latest-generation blood thinner. then i made the switch. xarelto® significantly lowers the risk of stroke in people with afib not caused by a heart valve problem. it has similar effectiveness to warfarin. warfarin interferes with vitamin k and at least six blood-clotting factors. xarelto® is selective. targeting one critical factor of your body's natural clotting function. for people with afib currently well-managed on warfarin, there is limited informaon on how xarelto® and warfarin compare in reducing t risk of strok like all blood thinners, don't stop taking xarelto® without talking to your doctor, as this may increase your risk of a blood clot or stroke. while taking, you may bruise more easily, and it may take longer for bleeding to stop. xarelto® may increase your risk of bleeding
if you take certain medicines. xarelto® can cause serious, and in rare cases, fatal bleeding. get help right away for unexpected bleeding, unusual bruising, or tingling. if you have had spinal anesthesia while on xarelto®, watch for back pain or any nerve or muscle-related signs or symptoms. do not take xarelto® if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding. tell your doctor before all planned medical or dental procedures. before starting xarelto®, tell your doctor about any conditions, such as kidney, liver, or bleeding problems. to help protect yourself from a stroke, ask your doctor about xarelto®. insurance changes? xarelto® has you covered. it is tuesday, january the 3rd. mika has the morning off. she is where, my friends? south of france and couldn't be us. and this is really big.
veteran columnist and msnbc contributor, what is he? >> legendary! >> please. let's end this. or i'll end it. >> no, we have the managing editor of bloomberg politics, mark halperin, contributor to "time" magazine, msnbc political analyst, and former aide to the george w. bush white house and state departments, the very busy, elise jordan. also, former treasury secretary -- official future treasury secretary and "morning joe" economic analyst, steve rattner. and in washington, d.c., we have msnbc political correspondent, cas kasie hunt. i'm thinking, if i the new republican congress, mike -- >> you'd pass a the -- a get out of jail card. >> i'm thinking, maybe we can talk about obamacare and making is sure that we ensure health care through market-driven forces or maybe, maybe we can be a check against donald trump on all these issue concerns and we can tell our people everything's going to be okay. or maybe -- no. what do they do, mike?
>> house votes to gut ethics office. >> dudes, what -- dudettes, what's wrong with you? >> arrive in washington and vote yourself a get out of jail card, immediately. no investigations, no ethics investigations, no reporting, really. >> kasie hunt, what's up? what's going on here, kasie hunt. these put these laws in effect after mark foley, jack abramoff, you know, people like me, i mean, come on! do you want to clean the place up? >> i think the ethics office was just for you. >> it was the joe scarborough memorial, pray to god he never comes back to washington and screws up things again like he did when he was here, and they gut it, why? >> it's a surprise move. and it's just a few hours before this new congress begins. house republicans decided to put an end to their own independent ethics oversight. last night, they voted to put the office of congressional ethics, it's a watchdog that was created by democrats in the wake of jack abramoff, not joe
scarborough, jack abramoff's lobbyist bribery scandal, under the jurisdiction of the house ethics committee. so what that does is force investigators to report to the very membershat they're supposed to be monitoring -- >> no, no, no. >> members who spoke out in favor of the decision said it would restore accountability and due process for members accused of wrongdoing. the new rules prohibi t office from considering anonymous allegations -- >> why? >> reporter: because the investigation must stop if members of the ethics committee orders it to. it prohibits investigations of activity before 2011. and says it can't share information with law enforcement without the committee's approval. democrats in the upper chamber responded. senator elizabeth warren tweeting, quote, tell us, gop, who exactly thinks the problem with washington is that we have too many rules requiring the government to act ethically? and minority leader chuck schumer tweeted, house gop votes to turn independent ethics office into an unread complaint box. why won't the gop keep their
party promise to drain the swamp? that, of course, is the slogan from the trump campaign. so -- >> i'm sorry, go ahead, kasie. >> i was just going to say, essentially they're saying, we're going to officially be able to have the ethics committee, but we're going to bury everything underneath it. they're essentially rendering the whole thing toothless. >> you know, mark, this seems like a great opportunity for the incoming president to show his independence, to show he wants to drain the swamp, and immediately start hampering them on this. this is ridiculous. it's the last thing -- but this is what happens. i mean, time and time again, a party takes control of power. and here republicans have complete power. and their first act out of the gate is just complete arrogance. it's a horrific misstep. >> don't be surprised if by the time we reconvene here tomorrow at 6:00 a.m. this has been reversed. >> well, i know paul ryan is against this. >> he voted against it, as did kevin mccarthy.
>> good for them. they spoke up for the rest of those guys. >> there's not zero argument for this, which is to say there's some question about due process, but i think by the time we reconvene tomorrow, they will have come to their senses, because the optics of it are absurd. >> well, that's just, why do this as your first move, not even try to cover it up and try to -- >> well, they did. they did try to cover it up. there was no debate about it. if you really had a serious argument to make, you wouldn't just vote in secret, you would, article on, announce we're going to lead a national discussion about the importance of -- >> but you're right, though, elise. the first law we passed after we got elected in '94, i think the first law we passed, was we passed a law that made sure that all the laws that we passed applied to us, as well. >> the opposite optic. >> right. it was like, if we're going to pass a law, we can't exempt ourselves from it. so all laws passed against america, we also have to live by those laws. and it was great!
and we passed one reform after another reform after another one, balanced budget acts, all these things we tried to do, term limits, some of them passed, some didn't. the optics were absolutely fantastic. after the first hundred days, i was never going to lose another election again. here, the very first thing they do -- go ahead. >> you said it's a test for a president-elect. it's a test for rush limbaugh, fox news, breitbart, conservative grassroots. >> oh, they're not going to -- >> they'll excuse it. they'll excuse it. >> but also -- >> i bet some of them don't. >> but what's interesting about this, beyond what you guys have said, which i obviously disagree, you have ryan and mccarthy both against it. it's a question of the leadership and how strong the leadership is and what this says about other things coming down the pipe with the rank and file versus the leadership. >> and elise, it's going to be up to paul ryan to show that he has more control over his caucus than john boehner did. and at some point, he's going to have to have a moment. i'm not saying this is it, where he says, you're either going to follow me or you're not going to
follow me. and if you're not going to follow me, i'm going back to wisconsin and hanging out with my family and making a lot more money. >> as a former member of congress, how much do you think this is about these foreign junkets and about the trips and the gifts and wanting to be table to keep that as behind the scenes as possible? >> i think it is. and i think it's about sheer arrogance, too. everybody forgets, they really do forget, and they forget what happened two years ago. and two years ago before that. everybody, once they get in there, people walk through the white house and they think, we're the first people who's ever gotten here. we've cracked the code and we're smarter than everybody that's been here before. that's what congressman think. that's how people think. and then two years later, nancy pelosi's speaker. again, i always use the example of, mike, of karl rove in 2004 talking about a permanent republican majority.
two years later, nancy pelosi is speaker of the house. 2008, barack obama, hope and change, this is a coalition that will change america forever. and that was just the people in the press saying that. two years later, the tea party comes to town. so there's always a next election. it always comes at you too fast. and you never want to start this way. i hope you are right, mark. this needs to be reversed. and paul ryan needs to take charge. and say, guys, you're looking like idiots. like you have something to hide. this is not how we are supposed to start our new republican era. >> well, it's just one more outstanding commercial for term limits. >> oh, yeah. >> the fact is, you've got a huge percentage of members of congress in safe seats. they do not care. they're going to be re-elected no matter what they do. they gut t ethics provision. i think steve ised theiggest issue here. what does this or tend for the
immediate future, for paul ryan's leadership in the house of representatives. he can't get the members to go along on an ethics thing, what does he do when donald trump comes in with a democratically tinged proposal -- >> democratically tinged proposal. that is -- >> it would help if trump would hurry along his press conference, letting us know how he's going to handle the ethics of higher office, and set an example. i do think that it is leaving -- he is giving cover to -- he's going to give cover to everyone if he himself at the very top isn't following the rules. >> well, we know he's not going to follow the rules, but to that point -- >> what rules will he not follow? >> all the rules. the rules that require you if you serve in government position to not have a financial interest in things that you are involved with. i know the president is exempt. >> therefore, i just want to be clear here, he's not going to ignore the rules. there are no rules against presidents. which, by the way, is one of the most shocking things about this transition. i never knew that was the case, until trump got elected.
>> it's apparently a constitutional thing, when they passed that law. >> so you can't accurately say -- and i'm not being, oh, whatever, i want to be exact. he's not -- because we've got a story coming up -- >> he's not following the rules that apply to everybody else who works for him. >> just like as a member of connecticut, i don't follow the motorcycle helmet laws of wisconsin. >> i don't think that's exactly the right analogy. >> it is. >> you've got everybody works for him following a set of rules he's not legally required to follow and decided he's not going to follow them. >> let's be exact here. donald trump has no -- does not have the same rules applied to him as president of the united states -- >> there is a rule about taking money from foreign entities. >> that's true. the emoluments clause. >> that's a big clause. >> your point? >> my point is already you have a situation where the ethics and compliance rules and so forth on capitol hill are more relaxed
than they are on the executive branch, and now they want to make them even laxer. >> laxier. >> all right, well, you know, as we talk abou this, mike, there are now questions thisorni about the continued business ties of the president-elect. a new video shows donald trump speaking to the new year's eve party at his mar-a-lago resort in florida. the video was filmed by a guest and obtained by cnn and it shows donald trump singling out and praising a billionaire developer from dubai, whose company built the trump international golf club in that country, as well as other luxury properties. and it is at work on a building of a second golf course scheduled to open next year. last night, trump senior adviser kellyanne conway rejected any suggestion that trump's private business is interfering with his new public office. >> i find that to be so completely ridiculous and specious. this man is allowed to have a new year's eve celebration with his friends and his business partners or his acquaintances. i mean, the idea that he's giving a speech recognizing a
friend and his beautiful wife and people are just going to twist that around to somehow it's a business favor pip mean, we've got to get ahold of ourselves here. i think donald trump said it best when he said that, you know, if it were up to some people, he would never talk to his children again. that's not going to happen. one can disentangle their business interests from the fact that he's going to be 100% committed to his job as president of these great united states and still have a relationship with his children. same thing with -- >> and just following up -- >> right, so this fascinating story, because you know, i don't know if you know this or not, but i was not actually at the new year's eve party. >> i think we've learned that over the last -- >> oh, god. what that grim way to start the new year. tweeting about it for five days. i was not at the party. i did talk with the president-elect for 15 minutes or so, away from the party. but i was there the night before, as i wrote "the washington post," and had dinner
with him. and this guy from dubai was -- it's very interesting. i looked around, it was a very small room. and you looked around and it was the first time i sort of figured out what donald trump's social life is like. who he surrounds himself with. and it kind of help med understand better the cabinet people that he's been picking, which i haven't quite understood. and, it's just like, it's just like reagan. you know, reagan liked surrounding himself with entertainment figures. peoplet he'd grown up with, people that he knew. these people were all developers. guys that had done huge projects in dubai. guys who had done the biggest projects in las vegas. guys who had done the biggest projects all over the world. and before he sat down, he was milling around and talking to all these people. and they were talking like he was. you know, talking about this deal, and said, oh -- you know, and you had been very comfortable with him there. so, you know, we've got to get
out of this project and we've got to -- but you know what, we can write off the $300 million and we can move it over -- and i just sat there and i was like -- they asked me, i said, like, i like purple. i don't know this stuff. and this dubai kept coming up to him and kept saying, donald, donald, we got a deal, you can do it, we could make $2 billion. and donald said, i can't do it. and then it's funny, he goes, well, i can do it, but i'm not going to do it. and that was -- >> president of the united states! >> but he does understand, though, i thought it was very -- that all of these people are coming at him. and, you know, they always have. and it points something else out, too. that the media really in saying, oh, donald trump wasn't a real businessman. oh, donald trump, all they do is put his name on buildings. he's just a pathetic loser. he's not worth this, he's not worth -- and then suddenly afterwards, all the stories blow
up that actually, he is an international man of mystery. he's got projects all over the globe and they are big projects. so -- but this guy, i actually heard their interaction. and this guy was like bemoaning the fact that trump couldn't do a deal with him, because trump wouldn't do a deal with him, because trump's out of that business, you know? >> yet, all these people paid for the privilege ohanging out at mar-lago that night. i don't think reagan was -- >> this was the night before. >> so this was the private. this was the members. and then the next night, so that night wasn't as developer heavy. and that was people -- >> was he saying he couldn't do a deal with him, or his company couldn't do a deal with him? >> i think it was -- i mean, i don't know. but i think it was both. that we couldn't -- >> well, if the answer is i can't do a deal because i'm president, he's actually behaving and living within the emoluments claus. >> >> that was the joke. he said, i can't do a deal, i would love to do a deal, but he can't do the deal.
well, i could do the deal, but i can't do the deal. >> my sense is they're headed towards a set of guidelines about how it's going to operate that will go further than the skeptics have worried about, but not nearly far enough for people who think they can have zero relationships to the private sector. >> there is an understanding that he is going to be president, from everything that i've gathered around during the transition, that he is going to be president of the united states and it is the most important thing to him and he wants to do a great job, so much so that he derides other people who go on vacations and he says, if you've got that job, why are you not in the white house 20 hours a day working nonstop? and so, there is an understanding with -- i've spoken with ivanka over the past month. and they basically have said, they learned in the transition, like, boy, wow, okay, those fastballs were coming at us quickly. they understand they're going to have to be more careful.
you know, we have the charity thing. ivanka did her coffee that she does every year, where she was going to raise $75,000 for st. jude's hospital. got attacked for that. and they're like, okay, if they're going to attack me for what i've been doing for years to help st. jude's, i guess we really have to change the way we're doing things. >> right, but if that's all true and i have to reason to think it's not, why would he not voluntarily come poliply with t rules everybody else has to. >> i don't think you would. >> what? >> i don't think you would. >> i've read in "the new york times," the amount of money steve paid for legal fees was -- >> i don't think i would. i think i would look at what rules would make americans the most comfortable, but i'm not going to just take a set of rules that apply to other people and put them on mef they don't apply to me. >> wl -- >> and when i say, me, i think most people would look at it --
>> except i believe that every president in modern history has complied with the rules voluntarily. >> and barack obama is one of the most ethical president we've had. how much has barack obama made writing books -- >> but isn't the bigger problem -- >> how much has barack obama made writing books? >> $3 million. >> it's a lot more than that. $10, $11, $12 million. >> but he wrote those books before he was president. >> and trump did his business before he got to office. >> and i don't think there should be a problem -- that's why i think "the apprentice," i think all the uproar about "the apprentice" royalties, it's royalties just like a book. i don't think the problem is with intellectual property, with licensing. >> i don't care about royalties. >> i don't care about that. it's new deals that everyone is so concerned about. >> the only way trump could satisfy the spirit of what steve's talking about is if they dissolve the business. and he's not. >> that's not true. >> and why should he? steve, let me ask you this.
if you had spent the last four decades busting your ass, building hotels all over the world, building golf courses all over the world, working 20 hours a day, then you got elected president of the united states, it seems to me if you said, okay, listen, i will still -- it's like the intellectual property, with books. i'm still going to get the financial benefit from that. i don't want to see it, funnel it off somewhere else, have somebody else hold nout in a private trust, that's fine, but i'm not involved in the day-to-day operations and i'm not even guide them and tell them what to do. it seems to me, would that the no be legitimate or not? >> i'll sa i spent a number of years busting my butt building a business on wall street and when i went into the government, i had to completely sever every single tie i had with that business. even a blind trust is not loud. >> did you sell it or get bought out? >> i got bought out and cashed out and so on and so forth. >> what would you have done if
your kids had been in that business with you and still wanted to work there. >> that's exactly where i was going. the rule is for anybody, if you have adult children, they obviously aren't covered. why would a 30-year-old kid be covered? so what he could do is he could simply transfer ownership of the business to his kids. that would be that. >> that's fine, right? >> that would be fine. but he doesn't seem to want to do that. a blind trust is not quite compliant, but it would at least be a step. >> but if he transfers it to his two boys? you think that would be okay? >> that would be completely laws. i know he's not subject to the laws, but under the laws -- >> i think this is such a classist argument. because in america, we glorify wealth so much, oh, it's such a sacrifice for him to give up this wealth that i have respect for and he's built up over decades. but what do we do when we send a young private or sergeant out to war? they give up everything? they can haven't these conflicts. they're going to get their legs blown off and that's that. so i think that donald trump, you know, it's painful for him, but it's also painful for the families of people that he's going to send off to war.
>> so you think he should sell off of the interests in his business and -- >> i think he should. it is a huge sacrifice, but he knew that he was running for leader of the free world and it's a sacrifice he's got to make. >> actually, i -- some of the things i've said here is just for the same of argument. that's probably what i would do. >> i agree. >> still ahead on "morning joe," house majority leader kevin mccarthy will be our guest later this hour. and as president obama gets ready to deliver his farewell address next week, we'll be taking a look at why democrats suffered such devastating defeats after devastating defeats over his eight years in office. plus, a slew of progressive accomplishments that the president was ableo t done. steve rattner is breaking it down with his charts wake up the kids. this is going to be exciting when "morning joe" returns.
i'm going to the bank, to discuss a mortgage. ugh, see, you need a loan, you put on a suit, you go crawling to the bank. ugh, sthis is how i dress, to get a mortgage. i just go to lendingtree. i calculate how much home i can afford. i get multiple offers to compare side by side. and the best part is... the banks come crawling to me. everything you need to get a better mortgage. clothing optional.
stretches all the way back to george washington in 1796 when he gives that farewell address from chicago next week. we're looking forward to that. president obama announced his final speech before he leaves office will be tuesday, january 10th, at the mccormack place, the same venue as his 2012 election night celebration. the president said in san e-mail to supporters that he's just starting to writing his remarks, but, quote, i'm thinking about them as a chance to say thank you for this amazing journey, to celebrate the ways that you've changed this country for the better in the past eight years, and to offer some thoughts on where we all go from here. the white house says there's a long list of accomplishments under president obama, but not all democrats have reasons to celebrate after those eight years. in fact, it's been a very bleak eight years for democrats under barack obama steve rattner hasharts to explain why. this is going to be fascinating, steve. let's talk about it. >> so let's look at the facts and see what's actually going on
and compare and contrast his political record with his economic record. on the economic side, as we all know, unemployment has dropped dramatically from 7.8. it was over 10% early in his administration to 4.6. and we've had 81 months straight of job growth, a record. the dow jones average for the capitalist who is happen to be watching is up 125% over his time. real gdp, that's after adjusting for inflation, is up15% din his time in fice. and if you tn to some other areas of his presidency - >> you would have to switch the charts to do that. >> we're going to do that, because i missed up, you see that he pledged to bring the troops home and he almost did, down to 15,000 from 173,000. and then, of course, there's obamacare, 20 million more americans getting health care. the record low percentage of americans without health care. and even real median family income, this has obviously been a big issue in the campaign, has
started to turn up and is now a little bit ahead of where it was in real terms. >> although, steve, i've got to say, when you look at these numbers, obviously the democratic party has enjoyed one of its best time periods. one of its best eight years in modern history. those numbers are just an unqualified success. congratulations to the democrats from coast to coast. >> and now let's look at how they fare politically. so if you look at what's happened since the president came, the number of democrats in the house, when they had control of the house, has dropped from 256 to 187. and as you've said a number of times, the highest percentage of republicans since 1928. the number of democrats in the senate has gone from 58 to 46, and they were actually briefly over 60 including the independents who caucus with them. they had a filibuster-proof majority. the number of democratic governors has gone from 29 to 16. >> you know, that is the most, i think, devastating, because that's going to impact
redistricting as we move forward to 2020, which impacts the blue charts. >> well, also -- >> in the house. >>ut tohat point, they've lost over 900 seats in the state legislatures, the percentage of state legislators that were republican have gone from 54 to 88%. coming up, kevin mccarthy will join us as the 115th congress is set to go underway. we'll be asking kevin why the white house republicans decided to put an end to their independent ethics oversight panel. and look at the top ten risks and hot spots for 2017. "morning joe" will tell you where those are when we return.
studies show that toms have the highest average earning potential over their professional lifetime. see? uh, it's a girl. congratulations! two of my girls are toms. i work for ally, finances are my thing. you know, i'm gonna go give birth real quick and then we'll talk, ok? nice baby. let's go. here comes tom #5! nothing, stops us from doing right by our customers. ally. do it right. whoo! look out. ally. do it right. you could start your search at the all-new carfax.com that might help. show me the carfax? now the car you want and the history you need are easy to find. show me used minivans with no reported accidents. boom. love it. [struggles]
a manhunt still underway in turkey following the deadly new year's eve nightt nightclub shooting in istanbul. authorities are searching for this man who they say is a state department behind the attack that killed 39 and injured dozens. police have confirmed that to nbc thuz that selfie video shows the suspect walking around a book fair in the city just days before the attack. early this morning, turkish
authorities released a name for the suspect, we're learning it may not be the name of the attacker. so do not be on the lookout for mike barnicle. not the proper name. >> no. >> but we will bring you the developments as they happen, in case authorities in turkey start looking at mike barnicle again. with us now, let's bring the president and founder of the eurasia group and foreign affairs columnist and editor at large, living large for "time" magazine, ian bremmer. ian at the eurasia group, and it's out this morning with a new rert from the top global risks for 2017. and ian, come on, i think you're being a little cutesy here. a little clever by half. is north korea not the number one threat to america? >> well, trump's doing his best in the last 24 hours to move them up. i don't mind him tweeting, but i
would like him not to tweet about north korea. >> why's that? >> at the end of the day, it's less about a north korea risk himself, than it is about the fact that trump has in every which way tried to alienate and antagonize the chinese before becoming president. >> would it be better if dennis rodman tweeted about north korea? >> yes. it would be considerably better. >> but not trump. >> not trump. >> so let me ask you this. >> assad must go. russia must leave ukraine and now north korea will not develop a new -- >> assad must go. there is a long-standing tradition of saying things that don't become reality. >> assad must go, mubarak must go. >> absolutely. because how does he know and how does trump know? how is he going to stop this? it leads to a lot of dark questions that are really the subject of national debate, whether we're going to preemptively strike -- >> but what do we do as a policy matter to deal with this? >> what does any president do as a policy matter? just stop north korea from having the ability in three or four years and destroying and obliterating seattle. >> many administrations have
failed at this. trump will be one of several. but what i suspect trump will start doing is saying, look, 90% of the north korean economy comes from china. so, therefore, the chinese have to cut these guys off, unilaterally. and if they don't, we're going to sanction the chinese, the banks and others, which is very consistent with what he's been saying about currency, about tax, aut the south china sea and all this stuff. the most important bipartisan relationship in the world is one of the ones that obama actually managed reasonably well. >> what do we do when the most important bilateral relationship we have in the world has the chinese doing very, very little on what may be an existential threat to our coast in a few years? >> given that north korea has nuclear weapons now, if you really want to endure negotiations, you can't say, let's pretend we are where we were 20 years ago. you have to recognize the nukes they now have, recognize the ballistic missiles they now
have, and say, let us start with carrots and sticks from there. your starting point can't be, they have to give up all their nukes, which is present u.s. policy. then we work with the chinese and others. there was, believe it or not, a u.n. security council resolution passed unanimously in the last month. we don't do much of that, unanimous u.n. security council resolutions with the chinese willing to sanction. but that's a multi-lateral process. one thing we've seen from trump, he doesn't like multi-lateralism. it's america first. we're doing the driving, not other people. >> so -- >> just wait and see. >> number two on your top ten is china overreacting -- >> but let's go with number one first. what's number one? >> number one is independent america. number one is the idea that -- >> america first. >> america first. that the bonds and shackles of responsibility of being the global policeman, of being the architect of global trade, of promoting global values no longer applies -- this is america 1922.
>> this is -- in the sense that it's more unilateral -- >> you can just say yes. >> not quite. >> i think he's saying, we're going to be more unilateralist. we're going to act around the world, but do it on our own. >> and the funny thing about entering a geopolitical recession, is that it doesn't apply to the united states, right? all of these problems that will grow outside of america because the u.s. isn't doing the relationship, we don't have the refugee problem. >> have we been doing leadership over the last eight years? >> no, we've been doing a lot le. >> and isn't that the real problem, that we went from sort of a hypervigilance in the bush era to lethargy in the obama administration, where we've just retreated across the globe. in terms of -- >> we have. >> in terms of leadership role. >> rtainly, if you ask american allies under the obama administration, do you believe that the united states is there for you, a lot of them, the saudis, the gulf arabs --
>> most of the arabs. >> many of the asian allies would say, we're not sure. now, add to that the destruction of the transpacific partnership, add to that questions around nato. add to that sort of trump's cozying up to putin, wherever that leaves. and suddenly they know that the u.s. position. >> number three, angela merkel, elections coming up, russians hacking the elections, talk about that. >> well, merkel is one of the only leaders out there that you have to worry less about her actually getting re-elected. but her weakness means that all of the european crisis -- >> you think she's going to be re-elected? >> yeah, i wouldn't say that about france, but in terms of -- in germany, you don't have the hollowing out of the economic middle class that you do in other parts of europe. so there's really not a direct threat to her the way there is to france. but the one thing you've seen since the financial crisis has been merkel's ability to lead the response to crisis as they occur in greece and cyprus and portugal and spain and
everywre else. >> moving to number four, slowing of the pace of economic reforms. >> lack of leadership outside of the united states. you look at other countries -- >> they're all being impeached, aren't they? >> in the case of brazil, in the case of south korea. but look also at the elections in france and germany, look at india and mexico where they did a lot of reform, but now that process is on hold for a while. places like saudi arabia that really need it, but it's a bridge too far. you know, money around the world is wonderi where it's supposed to go, and the united states, frankly, is going to be the answer. the geopolitics everywhere else and the economic reform not happening. the u.s. becomes a very attractive market. >> isn't it fascinating, five years ago, everyone was talking about the emerging powers and we thought that it was going to, you know, look at all the emerging powers everybody was talking about. right now, they're all sick. >> yeah. >> economically. >> with the exception of china. you look at other -- >> and china's really slowed down a great deal from where they were five years ago.
>> china's complicated. >> look, that's why our stock market was up -- part of our stock market was up 13% last year. others weren't. >> the near-term impact for the united states is clearly positive. the long-term impact with all of this geopolitical instability greater than i've seen in my lifetime clearly hits us too. >> i can't help but go back to north korea, just because the tweets were really unnerving. what's going to happen with the political situation in south korea, with probably the governments going to turn over from a hard-liner soon to perhaps a government that is more interested in diplomacy? how sta going to affect what trump does with north korea? >> and more aligned with china? i mean, a new government with the opposition coming in after president parks' likely impeachment means that they're going to get rid of the stad missile defense system that the americans are planning on putting in place. that's going to hurt south korea and japan relations. that's going to make the us negotiations if you want to call
them that with north korea more complicated. 2017 is the year we can't ignore it. >> thank you so much, ian. >> always great to have you here. >> appreciate it. >> back soon. still ahead, donald trump has taken to twitter in recent weeks, at the behest of ian bremmer. we'll take on boeing and lockheed martin. this morning, he made another direct warning to an american economy. 'll tell who he's targeting now a why it really does impact the stock. i mean what it's done to lockheed stock. ♪
look at you, saving money on your medicare part d prescriptions. at walgreens we make it easy for you to seize the day by helping you get more out of life and medicare part d. now with zero-dollar copays on select plans... ...and rewards points on all prescriptions, walgreens has you covered. so drop by and seize the savings! walgreens. at the corner of happy and healthy.
so donald trump tweeted out this morning, quote, general motors is sending mexican-made models of chevy cruz to u.s. car dealers tax-free across the border. make in usa or pay big border tax. let's bring in cnbc's brian sullivan. bri brian, apparently it had an impact on gm stock after the tweet. >> gm stock is down about 0.4%
this morning. but there's more web of intrigue here than in a "spider-man" sequel. let me lay this out for you. they're referring to the chevy cruz, a small four-door car that gm makes, it makes most of them in lourdstown, ohio, lourdstown, ohio is in trumball county, ohio. trumball county is one of the counties that flipped to trump this election after having gone solidly democrat in the past number of presidential elections. keep this in mind, the day after the election, general motors announced it was going to shut the third shift of chevy cruz production at lourdstown because of lack of demand. that impacted about 1,200 jobs. so you have gm in a county where he flipped over for trump where he made a lot of promises. the day after the election, gm says we're going to cut that shift to production. and now you've got this where, remember, there are other gm
model cars and trucks that are made in mexico. so why did trump go after the chevy cruz, as i called it, a cruise missile across gm's bow? you could say that it's random, but a county that flipped for trump the day after the election they announced the third shift is going to stop. you know trump a lot bte than i do. methinks this may not be coincidence. >> mike, you said buckle up. he has no problem doing this and sending a message to ceos. it works, in some cases. >> even before he's sworn in in 17 days, we are in uncharted waters. you have a president-elect of the united states tweeting about a vital part of our economy, general motors is the largest car company. the stock starts going down. we've never seen anything like this. >> how is this crony capitalism? how is it not? and also, what about his tweets? how are we going to prevent insider trading? who has knowledge of tweets before trump is tweeting them. it's true! >> on that point, it's safe to say, nobody.
>> but that's a very good -- >> there's another angle here, if that web of intrigue was not already deep enough, the ceo of gm, mary barra is on trump's strategic and policy forum, which is a counsel about u.s. jobs. keep in mind, some of these cruz molls, they're for export only. mexico's got more free trade agreements than any ore country out there. so you can make cars there and send them anywhere. china, latin america whereby where ever else you go. trump seems to be annoyed by some of the fact that these mexican-made cars are coming back. but trump made a lot of promises to ohio, trumball county in particular, and maybe he's sticking by it. >> brian sullivan, thank you so much. coming up next whave house majority leader kevin mccarthy with us we're going to be asking him about a movehat theepublican caucus made yesterday that some are questioning and we'll get his insights on what direction they m go today, next. tech: this mom didn't have time to worry about a cracked windshld. so s scheduled at safelite.com and with safelite's exclusive "on my way text" she knew exactly when i'd be there,
so she didn't miss a single shot. i replaced her windshield giving her more time for what matters most. tech: how'd ya do? player: we won! tech: nice! that's another safelite advantage. mom: thank you so much! (team sing) safelite repair, safelite replace. of bad breath germs% for a 100% fresh mouth. feeling 100% means you feel bold enough to... ...assist a magician... ...or dance. listerine®. bring out the bold™
not to be focusingo finaon my moderatepe. to severe chronic plaque psoriasis. so i made a decision to talk to my dermatologist about humira. humira works inside my body to target and help block a specific source of inflammation that contributes to my symptoms. in clinical trials, most adults taking humira were clear or almost clear, and many saw 75% and even 90% clearance in just 4 months. humira can lower your ability to fight infections, cluding tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections and cancers, clincluding lymphoma, have happened; as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. before treatment, get tested for tb.
tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common, and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. ask about humira, the #1 prescribed biologic by dermatologists. clearer skin is possible. well, joining us from capitol hill, house majority leader, republican congressman, kevin mccarthy of california. kevin, always great to talk to you. a lot to talk about this morning. how you doing? >> doing well, today's a big day, swearing in day. all excited. a chance to start moving forward. >> how exciting. a chance to move forward. let me first of all ask, we had breaking news, donald trump tweeted that gm cars made in mexico come back to the united states would face a stiff border tax. what do you think about that? >> i think we're looking at, when we talk tax reform, what are ways that we can go about
creating more jobs in america, but not having a trade war? >> right. >> if you want to build a company in america, your corporate rates are the highest. repatriation, if you sell overseas, you can't bring that money back here. so the structure today makes you push companies outside of america. i think in a tax reform that we're working on right now and we started before we even left in the last congress, could actually level the playing field and give america the ability to compete around the world. >> so would the president-elect's idea be seen by you and other conservative republicans in the house as a tariff that you would want to void? >> i think the best way to solve this problem is make it competitive here. make it able to bring your money back. make it, you can compete on a level playing field. and you know what? i count on america. i believe if we're given a level playing field, we will win. >> so you don't support taxing goods that were built overseas at borders, coming into u.s. consumers? >> well, you're at a disadvantage right now, because if you build them here and send them overseas, they put a tax on
it. they build a car overseas and send it to america, they get it rebated against theirs. it competes against ours at a unfair advantage. we need to make america competitive. and that's tax reform in my view. >> congressman, what happened behind closed doors yesterday on the ethics proposals? what did you say as opposing the measure, and what did you say the proponents of the measure? whatappened there? >> i think it was the right time to do it. i personally believe mt of these reforms are bipartisan supported reforms. if you read the task force on this, that was done back in 2007, that's where most of these reforms come from. now, let's first remember, because it seems as though a lot that's reporting that doesn't seem true. yes, it is true that i opposed moving forward on this at this time. i thought it was something both parties should take up at the same time. but this entity was created so the public could register a complaint against the congressional member. this entity was then supposed to investigate and then they move forward to the ethics committee
wi dismissal or to investigate further. all three of those things stay in place. all this does was make sure it puts a timeline, because people complain in the public that these investigations go on forever. so, when you really sit down and read the reforms, it's not what all the headlines are saying. and that's the problem in doing it in a manner of what's going forward today. >> so what happens today? >> it goes into the rules package. i will vote for the rules package. the rules package deals with a lot of entities when it comes to congress, but i will tell you this privately. most of the reforms inse dealing with the oc it's from across the aisle. it's from the task force. so i candon't want to put polit with it. that's why i thought this wasn't the best time to go forward with it. but the. ares don't change the entity. the public still registers a complaint. they still do the workwettics review and it still goes forward to ethics, whether they should dismiss it or review it. same thing before as today. >> this is gene robinson.
the reforms rule out anonymous complaints. they prohibit the office of congressional ethics or ever whatever it's now going to be called to have a spokesman, to say anything publicly. look, to the public, this looks like the first act of the new congress is to turn out the lights. so we can do whatever we want to do in the darkness. that's what it looks like. so is that the reason why this is not the best time to do it? and why are you going to now support it? >> well, the one thing i would say, the one thing we firmly believe in america is due process. and if someone makes or registers a complaint against you, just put their name. the public can put anything they want across in there and they're going to be investigated. i also think, just as we go through our legal process in america, people have a right to defend themselves if they're being accused of something. and let them go through and have the investigation instead of tried in the papers and in the media beforehand. and if something is there, they will be found guilty and move
forward. this keeps the same goal that we had, that the public has an entity to go to. the name change actually helps the public know where to go to. it speeds the process up if there's something there on a timeline when to get it done. that's the reason why at the end of the day, i'll still support it. i just think it should have been done in a different manner. you would have a bipartisan support with this. because it's not taking the office away. it's making reforms to it that a task force, a bipartisan task force, one of the entities on it sat with steny hoyer's chief of staff. so it's bipartisan. >> all right. elise? >> congressman, elise jordan here. i would like to hear your take on repealing obamacare and what replacement option you support and how quickly, realistically, it can be repealed? >> in the repeal process, we can do that pretty soon. if you'll watch, we'll start taking up the budget first in the senate first for 2017. the repeal process would
probably go through the mechanism of reconciliation abity toe able to do it. that takes fewer votes inside the senate. and then that gives you the time frame to actually put a health care system together that works. look, if we did nothing, you've got 1,022 counties in america today that only have one choice, one option when it comes to health care and one plan. you have 18 of the 23 co-ops who have collapsed. you've got premiums that have risen more than $4,300. so if you do nothing, this is collapsing upon itself in health care. so now you have a time, and this is why i took it upon myself last year to send a letter to every governor and every insurance commissioner, tell us your ideas. this should be a process where everybody can be a part of it and give us their very best ideas -- >> so you have something in place like donald trump is saying he needs to agree with this, before -- when you repeal obamacare, there there be something to replace it immediately? >> i think what you'll see is, if you repeal it, and those
decisions are made yet. you'll either have a transition period when the replace comes in, or you can have an almost of it already replaced with more coming forward. i think you have to have enough time where people can bring all the ideas in. look, one of the biggest problems with obamacare, it was one-party rule. one-party idea all the way through. i think everybody should have their ideas at the table. and we should find a system that actually works, that empowers the american person to have a relationship with their doctor, and lower the costs. >> cokeman kevin mccarthy, thank you so much for being with us. congratulations on getting sworn in yet again today. and having the largest majority, i guess, republicans have had since 1928. good luck with that. >> thanks very much. that does it for us this morning. stepnie ruhle is going to be picking up the coverage right now. stephanie? >> thanks so much, joe. happy new year. i am stephanie ruhle. this morning, we have got a lot to cover. first thing, ethics under fire. republicans in congress set to gut, you heard me, gut the watchdog