comey. he has let the country down for partisan purposes and that's why calling him the new j. edgar hoover. >> do you believe that james comey should resign, senator reid? >> of course, yes. he won't. he has a term there, and i'm sure he's going to keep the new administration -- they should like him. he helped them get elected. >> wow, welcome to "am joy." in a moment we're going to update you on donald trump's latest attack, this time on a civil rights icon, representative john lewis. but first, harry reid calling fbi director james comey to resign last month on this show. at the time senator reid alleged that the footbabi deliberately withheld information to help donald trump win. prohibiting partisan politicking when the fbi disclosed the anthony weiner related development in the hillary
clinton e-mail probe 11 days before the election. now months later the justice department inspector general says that he will review the fbi's e-mail investigation, especially during those vital days leading up to november 8th. one of the allegations he'll focus on is the possibility that the d.o.j. and the fibi might have improperly disclosed information. on friday democratic members of congress left a confidential briefing on russian hacking, outraged at the fbi director and some expressed concerns that comey might be unfit to lead the fbi. >> no, it's cssified and we can't tell you anything. all i can tell you is the fbi director has no credibility. that's it. >> congressman maxine waters, everybody. even the "wall street journal" editorial board wrote on thursday that the best service mr. comey can render his country now is to resign. if mr. comey declines, donald trump can and should fire him in the best interest of the
nation's most important law enforcement agency. joining me now is "washington post" opinion writer jennifer ruben, msnbc analyst david corn and consultant tara adele. thank you for being here. i'm going to go around the horn and get your response to that question of whether you think comey should stay or go. >> he should stay. he should stay because there -- you know, the reality, the politics of this is very clear, democrats really don't want him to go because they don't know what they're going to get next, who would trump put in, so they're going to suffer through this particular situation with comey. look, i think everyone in this town, regardless of their political strife, knows that at the end of the day comey has been an honorable guy. he's been good in the job. >> including 11 days before the election? >> there's a mistake and there's a lot of judgment calls that can be made there and the reasons for the judgment calls that he made and i think that's part of what the investigation has to get to. but i think this wholesale, whether it's maxine waters or anyone else calling for his
regular nation, is just political theatre at this point. >> it's not just democrats. it's the editorial board of the conservative "wall street journal." >> i do agree with michael, who are you going to get, rudy giuliani as the next head of the fbi? >> i would say this, if reports are to be believed and he is part of a joint task force along with the cia, investigating these alleged ties between the trump campaign and russia, he now has every insensitive to make sure that he gets to the bottom of that. he owes the democrats one, if you will. he owes the country one. >> and david, you reported in your interview with the former mi-6 spy, a great get by the way, congratulations on that, who made that dossier that's been circulating and prompting lots of derision on donald trump on twitter. he said that the former spy said he soon decided the information
he was receiving, he eventually felt it was sufficiently serious for him to forward it to contacts at the fbi. he did this without permission from the american that hired him. the response was shock and horror. after a few weeks the bureau asked him for information on his sources but did the fbi follow up? >> the fbi did follow up. he was in contact with them and they asked him to send his reports as he continued to report on those memos to the fbi, so they did receive them. so there is -- but there still is a big question, how thoroughly the fbi investigated the information in that is memos and that is something that i hope these various investigations, whether it's the i.g. investigation or maybe the senate intelligence committee investigation that was announced yesterday gets into because i think the public has the right to know if the fbi was really going all guns on the e-mail issue with hillary, was it doing the same -- >> right. >> -- privately with this information and these memos. maybe they didn't and they
discounted or maybe they didn't, but i think it does put cey in a really difcult place now. he's being investigated by his own i.g. at the justice department but at the same time i think democrats do not want to give this opening to donald trump who will pick if not a member of his family -- >> a stooge. >> he'll let giuliani do the picking which would be course. >> over to you, same question, tara. let me play a little bit of democrats reacting after being briefed by jim comey. they were not amused. take a listen. >> i can just report that my confidence in the fbi director's ability to lead this agency has been shaken. >> do you still have faith in fbi director comey? >> i want to. i have concerns. >> what do you think, tara? does he survive? >> i'm not sure. i mean, i think it really depends on what comes out in these investigations, particularly the independent watch dog investigation that has begun, because comey has -- he's under fire here and one of the
things that's not being talked about is his behavior has led to what continues to be an erosion of trust in our institutions. and that is a really important thing. the fbi plays an important role in our government, in our country on a number of different fronts, and if people don't have faith in its ability to execute in a way that they feel they can trust the agency, then that does more harm than good obviously. so i think that the outcome of these investigations and having the outcome hopefully come quickly is going to really be the determining factor. >> let me play just really quickly this exchange with angus king and jim comey on tuesday during the senate intelligence committee hearing. david is saying, yeah, it's a blockbuster. let's listen to angus king and jim comey. >> mr. comey, did you answer senator wyden's question that there is an investigation under way as to connections between either of the political campaigns and the russians? >> i didn't say one way or another, especially in a public
forum. we never confirm or deny a pending investigation. >> the irony of your making that statement here i cannot avoid, but i'll move on. >> on top of that, david, corn, there's a guardian article that says that many house democrats came out of that meeting angry that comey would not say even privately whether he's investigating trump/russia ties, even privately. >> what angus king is referring to was the key moment of that hearing. when senator ron wyden, the democrat from oregon, asked him if he would declassify information about trump associates' contacts with russia and make it available to the public. he said if you don't do that in the next 11 days before january 20th, i don't think it will ever come out. what's important here, wyden was basically signaling that the fbi does have information on
contacts between trump's circle and russians of some sort. we don't know what it is or thousand thorough it's been investigated but that's what's getting democrats really, really mad, because even in private he won't tell them what he has and what he's looked at. at some point there has to be -- we talked about trust a second ago -- trust between congress and the fbi. >> he's gun shy right now. he is right now i'm not saying nothing, i know nothing. talking has not helped him. >> it's his own fault. tara, i'll get you on this as well. it's not even just the statements that he made 11 days out and three days out from the election. he also gave a soliloquy on why he didn't feel there was an indictable case on hillary clinton. >> exactly. that's what has democrats really upset is this obvious double standard. put the investigations aside and i do believe we should wait to get the outcomes of the investigations because they may actually, i think resigning, we want to know what happens so i
think we want the investigation so we can get the full story. but i think on the other side, there's a lot of evidence out there now without the investigations that comey applied a double standard. he spoke a lot about secretary clinton. this is on the record. there was a press conference. there are transcripts of what he said. now when it comes to donald trump, even in a classified setting, he refused to give congress members, some of whom were part of giving him information about donald trump to investigate, he refused to give them any information in a classified setting, which is again something that does not typically happen. so he has continued to break with protocol. he's continued to break with tradition, and all of it has been seemly to harm one party over the other. >> i believe comey is a man of good faith and his judgments have not been partisan driven. i think there may be some mistakes.
he may be handcuffed because the investigation of hillary clinton was not a national security investigation. it was a criminal investigation and they decided there was no crime here, poof, it's gone, then he decided to talk about it. the investigation against donald trump might be what we call a counter intelligence investigation with very sensitive sources and methods. so he may be in a bind, but he still has to be able to talk about that in classified settings. >> there's one person who can classify that and that's the president of the united states. he has how many days now? five, six? so up until noon on friday, the potential for that to be declassified or parts of that to be declassified still exists. the question is will he do that on the way out the door. >> really quickly, do we wind up then with comey being investigated, starting to drag out some information that could make comey look bad? he was involved in prosecuting mark rich who was pardoned by bill clinton. he had involvement in would it wat
-- white water. there was a story about him accepting on award from no socks tony or whatever his name was, that he accepted an award from donald trump associates. he does seem to have some partisan affiliations and you've got the new york fbi using a book that is associated with steve bannon "clinton cash" as the basis for going after hillary clinton. >> all of that you just said meanings absolutely nothing in the context of what's going on right now, will have no bearing on the outcome. >> unless it means something about the appearance of im pashalty. >> it gets to proving that, good luck. >> that's going to be the problem. a lot of stuff is going to get dragged out that's not going to make him feel particularly good. we'll be back. we have to say good-bye to michael steel. that seems criminal. we might keep you aroun here. > coming up, there are two iron clad rules of politics. michael steel will tell you, don't ever go after michelle obama and don't ever, ever, ever go after john lewis. michael steel told me that.
i don't see the president-elect as a legitimate president. >> you do not consider him a legitimate president, why is that? >> i think the russians participated in helping this man get elected, and they have destroyed the candidacy of hillary clinton. i don't plan to attend the inauguration. it will be the first one that i'm going to miss since i've been in the congress. >> thanks to congressman and civil rights icon john lewis, a leading democrat has finally questioned donald trump's presidency with candor and of course this morning trump's
itchy twitter finger struck back. congressman john lewis should spend more time on fixing and helping his district which is in horrible shape and falling apart. the election results, all talk, sad. civil rights groups are marching here in washington this morning in opposition to trump. the timing. back with me, michael steel and joining me now is mark thompson. mark, it is not lost on many that donald trump chose to attack civil rights hero john lewis on martin luther king weekend. >> big mistake. i agree with what michael said earlier, that's something you just don't do. it also draws a very clear analysis of who he is. that's why it's important we're all here to march today because of what trump represents. i think that what we're seeing
and president obama i think paraphrased dr. king the other night in his farewell speech when he talked about pitting white working class workers and african-americans against each other. the same speech, the same worries dr. king said at the steps of the montgomery state capitol in 1965, he talked about what happened after the reconstruction, what happened after the election of the first congressional black caucus, and andrew johnson comes in with the help of a reactionary attorney general to oppose reconstruction, to take the right to vote back, in dr. king's words, to feed working white class people jim crowe, fed african-americans the bible and fed whites jim crowe. president obama alluded to that the other night. so now we can draw an analogy between that period and today, first congressional black caucus, first african-american president, same thing. obama talked about that, the backlash, the whitelash. not to mention this is martin
luther king weekend and african-americans have ait of a history with the fbi and dr. king as well. >> i want to play one more bite of john lewis, and he talks about why he's not going to go to the inauguration and why he's taking this very tough stand on trump. take a listen. >> when you see something that is not right, not fair, not just, you have a moral obligation to do something. you cannot afford to be quiet or to be silent. >> what should be done? what should nancy pelosi do, chuck schumer do, barack obama do? >> we must not be silent. >> michael steel, one of the reasons i wanted to keep you around is to ask you this question. if you were still head of the republican party, how would you react or how would you advise donald trump to react to, a, the fact that john lewis isn't going to the inaugural and b,
questioning his legitimacy. >> number one, don't tweet that, number two, don't go there, and number three, step back and appreciate what's being said. you can put it in a partisan context. he's a democrat, i'm a republican. he's black, i'm white, all that. but what's undergirding that and how does a community perceive your respect or lack of respect for their leaders. >> right. >> and that says a lot. i think if you're looking to heal and bridge and bring the people of america together, well, we're part of that as black folks. we're a part of that. so our expectation is not only will you attempt that same effort that you would apply to white folks in other communities, but you will do so in a way in which you show respect for our leadership and those who do represent our interests to you on capitol hill. so, you know, the tweet is unnecessary, it's unfortunate. john lewis has a walk that very
few people in this country, least of all donald trump, have ever walked. so you have to respect that and pay attention to that, i think, in a real sense. >> reverend sharpton, mark, said to mike.com on friday,he democrats have said that they want to work with the incoming president trump when they can and not in other areas. we're saying voting rights, criminal justice reform, police misconduct, healthcare, jobs, and economic justice should be off the table as negotiating points. >> right. i agree those are nonnegotiable, absolutely, because we're still experiencing a lot of that. the report just came out about the chicago police department the other day. and i think that, again, this is martin luther king weekend, so to hear the words of john lewis, he is the conscience of the congress. for trump to go against him i think that is somewhat forboding of what we may be about to face with him. >> are you concerned about having jefferson sessions replace loretta lynch? he's leaving, the eric garner
case is still open. you have consent degrees in places like cleveland which who knows if he'll continue them. are you worried? >> very much. jefferson sessions -- >> jefferson baugh regard. >> as john lewis said so aptly the other day, he can be nice and friendly, but we know what his policies have meant and what he's been up to throughout his tenure, so i think we do have to be very concerned about that. coretta scott king's letter surfaced the other day, the one she wrote in 1986 opposing him to be on the federal bench. if he's not good enough to be on the federal bench, he's not good enough to be attorney general. >> i think that given that what you just said about how people perceive someone like jefferson -- >> that's his name. >> jeff sessions and so forth, i think that's an important opportunity for him as well given what's on his desk the day he walks into the office, t
appreciate and respect the full faith and credit we have that you're going to get that right and follow up on these big issues that are still outstanding. >> do you really think he's going to do that? >> i think he will. rhetoric aside, i think -- >> his history aside. >> i think that i'm going to gif him a little more runway than a lot of people do. my attitude is let's force these people to the point where they prove to us that they're not worthy. and that is, to your point, stay diligent and vigilant in the argument. the second point which really goes back to the first point you made, i think this is an opportunity for trump coming into the administration to show on those issues, whether it's criminal justice reform, education, all these other pieces that so directly impact the black community, show us that you're ready to step into this space with us. >> withdrawing their nomination and asking for the regular nation of james comey, that would be good for us. >> as d.l. hughley said --
>> there's no good faith. >> that's not necessarily true. that's a false -- you set that up falsely. >> we've got history. >> but that's history based on what was done then in those jobs and those roles. this is a very different space. >> we are out of time but i will end. d.l. hughley had a rant in which he said it's not a good start when your outreach to the black community is a rapper, a comedian and a football player because it shows that donald trump seems to want us to run the ball but not run the country. not a good start. but thank you very much, mark thompson and michael steel for hanging around. i really am letting michael go. as we mentioned, jefferson baugh reguard sessions is on top to become the attorney general of the united states. the head of e black caucus says that would be a mistake. my interview with him straight head.
so beautiful. what shall we call you? tom! name it tom! 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.
tried to label you as a racist or a bigot or whatever you want to say. how does that make you feel? >> when you have a southern name, you come from south alabama, when i came up as a united states attorney, i had no real support group. i didn't prepare myself well in 1986, and there was an organized effort to caricature me as something that wasn't. it was very painful. >> you can almost hear the song playing as he and lindsey graham bonded over the heavy burden of being white conservative men from the south. but as cultural commentator j smooth reminds us, the focus on whether someone is racist is beside the point because it obscures the debate over whether their actions have racist consequences. >> just think about how this plays out every time a politician or a celebrity gets
caught out there. it always starts out as what they did conversation but as soon as the celebrity and their defenders get on camera they start doing judo flips into switching it into what they are. i've known this person for years and i know for a fact they're not racist and how dare you claim to know their soul because they made one watermelon joke. i need to hold him accountable for what he did. >> that moment of accountability came when cory booker made history by becoming the first sitting united states senator to testify against a colleague in a nomination hearing. >> senator sessions has not demonstrated a commitment to a central requisite of the job to aggressively pursue the congressional mandate of civil rights, equal rights, and justice for all of our citizens. in fact, at numerous times in his career he has demonstrated a hostility towards these convictions and has worked to
concerns about being made to testify at the very end of the witness panels. to have a senator, a house member, and a living civil rights legend testify at the end of all of this is the equivalent of being made to go to the back of the bus. >> that was congressman cedric richmond, head of the congressional black caucus, condemning the senate judiciary committee end of the day testimony of jeff sessions. congressman cedric richmond joins me now from the heavenly location of new orleans, louisiana. there's a lot of clouds behind
him. that explains why he looks like he's in heaven. congressman, you had a very strong statement about the three of you, yourself, john lewis, and cory booker being put at the end of the schedule. when did you find out that you guys were going to be put to the back of the bus, as you alluded? >> they consistently told us that we would be last. also, this is just a break from tradition in the senate. this has never happened before. members always testify after the nominee and before the public witnesses. and the other string that they wanted to attach to it was that we had to sit through the entire hearings that day in order to testify, knowing that we have congressional work and business to do to represent the people of our selective districts. so it was such a departure from the norm that i had to address it and it was more about defending john lewis than about defending myself or senator cory
booker. so senator leahy started it off and i just happened to finish it. >> what has been the reaction of your colleagues to your very, very strong statement? >> well, overwhelming majority of them agreed with the analogy i used. 100% of them agree with the sentiment, and that is that it was wrong, it was a departure, and we shouldn't allow it. the one thing that i will not do is allow a personal attack or disrespect on any of the members of the congressional black caucus but certainly not john lewis. >> congressman, you also have the speaker of the house, paul ryan, attempting to impose sanctions to prevent members which included john lewis the last time from making demonstrations and protests on the floor. do you feel whether it's on the senate side in these hearings or on the house side there is an attempt to essentially silence the opposition to donald trump? >> well, people would like to
silence us but i would just take from john lewis's life and many of our civil rights leaders that the consequences of their actions was never a thought when they had to make a decision to stand up for peace and equality and to fight racism and segregation. they knew the consequences of sitting at a lunch counter. it could be violence or it could be being arrested, but they did it anyway because their purpose was more portant. >> wt do you make of donald trump attacking john lewis via his twitter feed on this first day of martin luther king weekend? >> i think it's unfortunate and i think it's petty and silly. john lewis's record speaks for itself and i certainly don't have to remind the country that john lewis is one of those people that has made this country a more perfect union. he has bent that moral arc towards justice and if you compare his life and his experiences and what he has
given to this country compared to what donald trump has taken from this country, then i don't have to defend him and it's something that we really, i don't think, should talk about. it concerns me when the president of the united states, the president-elect, does not understand that he is about to be the president and that that requires him to be presidential, not to be thin-skinned, but to work harder to unite the country, and when you get criticized, take ten seconds, listen to the criticism and move on and address what's really important and not just to tweet in the early morning hours. >> very quickly, two-part question. number one, do you agree with congressman lewis's -- john lewis's assessment that donald trump is not a legitimate president, and are you going to attend the inaugural? >> well, john's assessment is john's assessment and i think that there are many facts that could lead towards his conclusion.
i have not formed an ultimate conclusion. i would just reiterate that even if he is a legitimate president, he doesn't know it and he doesn't act esidential. there's a mounting of evidence that suggests otherwise. if donald trump is worried about whether being considered a legitimate president, then the first thing he can do when he's sworn in is push the fbi and intelligence agencies to unclassify the documents and let the american people see what he saw and see what john lewis had the ability to see. so i think that that's important. and on the inauguration, i was leaning towards going. after this morning i have serious doubts, but it's something that i will decide over the next couple of days after talking to some of my caucus members and talking to my constituents. >> please let us know if you wind up going and if members of the congressional black caucus are going to abstain.
>> i will. thank you very much. >> i want to bring in advancement project executive director judith brown and the reverend dr. william barber. i'm going to go to you first, reverend barber, to get your reaction to donald trump attacking the great john lewis via twitter this morning. >> first of all, i agree with john lewis. i think that he's standing in the tradition of isaiah 58 that says cry loud and spare not, the tradition of dr. king when dr. king said sometimes a moral person has to take a person that's neither political nor safe nor popular but it's the right thing to do. notice what he said. he said illegitimate. the word there literally means out of step with the accepted norms and laws. when you think about the hacking with russia that is proven, the letters and the involvement of the fbi, when you think about we just came through an election
where the courts have said we have had intentional voter suppression, more than 868 voting sites in the black community, thousands of votes suppressed, the lies that trump told that were not pushed back by the media. there's a great deal of ill legitimacy to this candidate. i can tell you, over 10,000 clergy and activists wrote to ask to meet with him and they still have not responded. so i stand with john lewis as he stands in the tradition of the prophets to say what is right when people may not want to hear it. >> he found time to meet with steve harvey and put dr. ben carson in charge of urban housing. this is the testimony that was put to the back of the bus as cedric richmond said. this is john lewis. >> it doesn't matter how senator
sessions may smile, how friendly he may be, how he may speak to you, but we need someone who's going to stand up, speak up and speak out for the people that need help, for people who have been discriminated against. >> speaking of standing up and speaking out, judith, let's listen to jeff sessions and he's talking about one of the specific issues that he would oversee if he heads the department of justice as attorney general and that is the issue of consent decrees usually relating to police misconduct. take a listen. >> it's a difficult thingor city to be sued by the department of justice and to be told that your police department is systematically failing to serve the people of the state or the city. they often feel forced to agree to a consent decree just to
remove that stigma. >> do you trust jefferson sessions to stand up and speak out for the people in need of help or who have been discriminated against when it comes to enforcing consent decrees? >> not at all. for someone who is up for attorney general to already take the position that is a pro police position and in the face of the reports that the department of justice put out in ferguson and most recently in chicago that shows systemic problems with policing, everything from unreasonable use of force to killing that was unjust fu unjust fewed, and for him to say i'm going to be the chief enforcer of our civil rights laws but i stand with police is problematic. >> we just had this report on extensive problems in the chicago police department. do you trust jeff sessions to deal with those issues in the chicago p.d.? >> no. the report is damming for the chicago police department and unfortunately sessions is going to be in a position where he can actually undermine that consent
decree and undo all of the progress that this d.o.j. has been doing. >> reverend barber, what about the issue of voting rights, what are your concerns regarding putting jefferson sessions in charge of the voting rights of american citizens? >> what was interesting is the people, particularly the african-americans that supported him the other day in the testimony, they talked about, well, he visited me when i had a baby. you know, slave masters visited the shacks too. jesse hams hired black people. strom thurman. that doesn't mean you're a racist. this man has a contempt for the fifth amendment. he tried to lock up people who were protesting for voting rights. he hasn't said anything about the intentional voter suppression. he didn't even know he said about the north carolina case which is the largest case in the country. i have no doubt that he has con
department for the fifth amendment and as a senator he would not protect voting rights if we give him the authority to be the chief law enforcement officer in this country. and we're not talking about his past history. this is his recent history. in his recent history he has shown no repen tense and no reorientation to support the voting rights laws of this country. it is a scary thing to think that he would be the top law enforcement officer. >> you just had the trump administration announce that they are relieving the african-american head of the d.c. national guard from his position effective immediately. do you have concerns about jeff sessions as the person who would be in the robert kennedy position if there were protests and brutality against demonstrators? >> denitely. this is one of the things that the justice does. when there's a problem and people can't actually trust their local police departments, the justice department steps in, steps in to protect the community, steps in to protect
protestors. this department of justice, sessions is not going to be on the side of people who are actually trying to protect communities, the people who are standing up against unaccountable police departments. so this is a real crises to think that we're going to go backwards. there is no robert kennedy. there is no eric holder. there is no john door in this department of justice and unfortunately it leaves our communities more vulnerable. >> as somebody who routinely gets arrested in these protests standing up against what you see as injustice at the state level, are you worried that there will be no calvary coming from the federal government as jeff sessions takes over the d.o.j., reverend barber? >> deeply concerned. as my good friend just said, it takes us backwards. but i will say that it's not going to deter us from protesting and from engaging in civil disobedience. but jeff sessions again as a senator has shown contempt for the first amendment and the way in which he wants to track
muslims. he has shown contempt for the 14th amendment. he does not believe in equal protection under the law. this is a very troublesome. but as someone said about donald trump, he was not qualified to be president, jeff sessions is qualified to answer the call of that same kind of whitelash after holder and after loretta lynch. we have a fight on our hands and we have to engage that fight and we have to begin at day one. >> indeed. we will continue to watch what both of you are doing. thank you both. a peaceful mlk wkend to both of you. coming up in our next hour, new congressional action on russia's role in the election, and republicans begin the obamacare repeal, but where is their replacement? first more "am joy" after the break.
thanks to all our viewers who have helped us trend on twitter nationally for the past 18 weeks in a row. make sure that you join the conversation on twitter and facebook at "am joy" show and also snapchat and instagram at y-ann reid and follow me at joy-ann reid. upnext, president obama makes another huge change when it comes to cuba. stay with us. next, president o makes another huge change when it comes to cuba. stay with us. they all...want...to... how charge me.xes going? have you tried credit karma? does credit karma do taxes now? yeah, and they're totally free, so they'll never take any of your refund. file your taxes for free with credit karma tax.
in one of his final foreign policy decisions, president obama is ending a 22-year-old policy giving special status to cuban migrants who reach u.s. soil without visas. under the wet foot dry foot policy, cubans are returned to their country but cubans who reach american soil are allowed to stay. president obama said, quote, by taking this step we are treating cuban migrants the same way we treat migrants from other countries. joining me florida polster and
radio host, fernand armandi. your reaction to this change on wet foot dry foot? >> joy, it wasn't unexpected because all along this was going to be a natural consequence and biproduct of the normalization. what was surprising a little bit was the timing of the announce coming really at the 11th hour of the obama presidency but because having given any sort of a date -- in other words if the president said this policy will take effect at a certain date, it would have triggered a mass exodus of cubans leaving the island. there's no other way it could have been than the way it was done which was an immediate announcement. joy, what i find the most interesting about the reaction to the policy is that it shows that again for certain members of the republican party, governing while democrat is a big no-no apparently because many of the same republicans who called for the end of this
policy recognizing the unfairness that it established and singling out the special status for cubans coming over and crossing the island are the first to criticize the actions by the president in having ended this last week surprisingly. >> very interesting. i want to talk about the politics of that and real the reaction of the sciu. monica russo runs that organization. with immigrant families under threat by an administration that has promised to round up and deport millions of people, it's unbelievable that president obama would refuse to protect the immigrant community. he's out trumping trump on immigration. on that piecehat trump has promised to round up and deport mols of people, is this part of politician of the barack obama administration, meaning subjecting a more republican hispanic constituency?
>> this is a big steaming pile of shade burger that barack obama is leaving donald trump as he walks out the door of the oval office. why? because donald trump has the same executive power starting next friday to reverse with the stroke of a pen this very initiative by president obama. obama knows that donald trump cannot do that, and this is really the doom's day scenario for the trump administration because come january 20th at 1:00 it is put up or shut up time. they can no longer do what they've been doing over the last two months which is stay in campaign mode. it's now governing time and they have to act with consequences and with actions with the eyes of the world watching and no one else to blame because donald trump and the republicans own the government right now. >> what happens when we start to see on wtvj and other miami television news stations the spectacle of now cuban migrants being sent back and not allowed to stay in the country? does that have a political impact on the republican party?
>> it does for those cubans that are already here in south florida that are going to be seeing the potential cruelty of this policy take effect. remember, their geographic positioning in florida always is going to be political consequences, so donald trump is really here between a rock and a hard place. if he grants this special status, and remember he campaigned on the promise of overturning all of the obama moves on cuba, he is going to face potentially a political backlash here. and remember, a lot of folks and a lot of actors here are in the middle. don't forget, marco rubio holds in his little hands the ability to block rex tillerson. so there's going to be some leverage points that take place over the next few days. a lot of folks are going to be seeing how president trump reacts to this. >> and somebody who wants to run for president named marco rubio. it's going to be interesting. thank you for being here.
because no one kills germs better than clorox. if they like donald trump, guess what, folks, that's called an asset, not a liability. now, i don't know that i'm going to get along with vladimir putin. i hope i do, but there's a good chance i won't. and if i don't, do you honestly believe that hillary would be tougher on putin than me? does anybody in this room really believe that? give me a break. >> i think a lot of people might believe that. good morning and welcome back to "am joy." the senate intelligence committee announced late friday that it will investigate russia's alleged interference in the presidential election, including potential contacts between the russians and donald trump's campaign staff. they said they're prepared to use their subpoena power to
compel testimony from senior trump and obama administration officials if necessary. the announcement follows media reports that trump's nominee for national security advisor, michael flynn, called the russian ambassador several times on the very day president obama expelled 35 russian diplomats as a sanction against russia for its interference in the presidential election and that the two have frequently been in touch in recent weeks. the trump team has acknowledged the calls took place but says the two merely discussed arranging a phone call between vladimir putin and donald trump after trump takes office. the senat investigation comes after trump denied allegations made in a leaked dossier that russia has compromising material that could be used to blackmail him. joining me now, malcolm nance, author of the plot to hack america, and mother jones david corn as well as michael mcfall, former u.s. ambassador to russia. malcolm, that dossier, i read all 35 pages of it. what's interesting about it is
is that the narrative it tells, it tells the exact same narrative you've been telling us since last summer which is that donald trump some years ago was compromised against the russians, that there's compromising information they have on him that they use to keep him loyal. is that a conclusionary document or a research document? >> it's a research document. this is why the journalists and the media are having such a hard time with it. it's not journalism. that's intelligence collection. what you're seeing there is relatively medium to low grade intelligence collection where you're working your sources and your sources are giving you first or second-hand information or rumors that they have. they may be checkable, but a lot of these aren't. that's the sort of thing that would get past that post diplomatic party in a cable or cia cable back to one of the op centers. once it comes back into the
public realm, you have a completely different perspective on it. you think you have to have something that's checkable by two sources. no. it creates a continuum of information and a block of data that we can extrapolate from in the intelligence community and cross-correlate to what we know. i understand that the document cnn reported on that was a two-page dossier that was extrapolated from that, that is intelligence which correlates to information which maybe in that 35-page document. so whoever gets to figure out what those bullet points are in that two-page document has the real dirt on donald trump. >> it's important to make that distinction because people are taking that dossier as if it is supposed to be definitive information, david corn, as opposed to work product. >> and as the guy who first wrote about it in october, i hate the term dossier. dossier makes it sound like someone sat down and put together a series of reports and information into a final product. these are memos, about two pages each, that the guy sent in maybe
once every week, every two weeks, the way that a reporter might send memos to an editeder. this is what i'm finding, i have two sources that says this, here's what it is. so it was never meant for public consumption, but to me the interesting thing is, okay, from a very early part of that process starting in june, the person putting it together started sending copies of it to the fbi. so the question is the fbi is getting this in and they're asking the person for the source of the information, what do they do. these are leads, these are tips. how seriously do they look at them. do they maybe look at them and say there's nothing here and we know they're not or do they use them. that's what we don't know, what the fbi did with this. >> so that means if something in it is wrong, the trump side has made a lot of the fact that they got wrong that michael cohen, trump's lawyer, was in prague.
one wrong piece of information and it discounts the while thol thing. >> your sources can be wrong. you can cross-correlate information and that can be wrong. you can make an assumption. i mean, we had that during the 9/11 period where we were saying that khaled sheikh mohammed was here and he was in prague. no, that stuff can always be wrong. it's what censored data or human intelligence officers are collecting out into the field. when they put that stuff together and it starts making an x and y and starts to become a little star full of corroborating data, that's true workable intelligence. >> ambassador michael mcfall, a couple of things. the overall narrative it seems donald trump and his team agree with is this notion that russia does collect this kind of intel on americans when you're in russia. you were the ambassador there. i think you would say that is true, that they will bug the
hotel room you're staying in. the list of why we should be worried about them. they hacked the dnc. they had an annexation of crimea. they destabilized ukraine. they backed bashar assad in syria and murdered journalists. we found out that christopher steel is now in hiding after his name was made public. as a former ambassador there, are you concerned for him, for hissafety? >> well, i want to be honest. i don't know the details of mr. steel. i don't know why he thinks he needs to be in hiding. i just don't know enough about his situation. i know that obviously the russian state has lots of capabilities with regard to gathering intelligence as you just described. most certainly they have the ability to gather intelligence on prominent american figures that came. we used to brief them all the time when members of congress would come or senior government
officials about these capabilities. but i don't want to speculate about what they have on trump or what they don't, and i want to warn everybody that i think it's highly unlikely that you'll ever be able to validate the kinds of accusations that are made in this document. i mean, to come back to the point about journalism versus intelligence, i'm very skeptical that with even an investigative committee by the senate that you'll ever be able to dig down on that because we're talking about activities that russian intelligence officials did. they're not going to show up because of a subpoena to tell you or me what they have and what they don't have. >> absolutely. but there are little points of data that do seem to be verifiable. one of the lines of argument, one of the sort of story lines that's developed over the course of time is the idea that there were people in the trump camp who had untoward contacts with
russi russia. shawn spicer trying to knock down this document tried to say that donald trump doesn't even know carter page. let's listen to sean spicer. >> one issue that the report talked about was the relationship of the three individuals associated with the campaign. these three individuals, paul manafort, michael cohen, and carter page. cart page is an individua who the president-elect does not kn and was put on notice months ago by the campaign. >> a person that the president-elect does not know and was put on notice months ago by the campaign. now here's donald trump talking about one carter page with the "washington post" editorial board on march 21st, 2016. >> it's all fake news. it's phony stuff. it didn't happen. and it was gotten by opponents of ours, as you know because you reported it and so did many of the other people. it was a group of opponents who got together, sick people, and they put that crap together.
>> sorry about that. that is donald trump at wednesday's news conference talking about this research document, but what trump actually said about carter page to the "washington post" editorial board back in march was, i can give you some of the names and these are names of his advisers, wall eed faris, carter page, phd, so he mentioned carter page as somebody who he was being advised by in terms of foreign policy. >> here we have sean spicer caught in a lie, a flatout lie. maybe he doesn't know him well. maybe carter page, his name was just used to give some boost to donald trump's very thin foreign policy resume, but you can't say he doesn't know him if he's citing him to the "washington post." so i'm sure as malcolm might tell you, a spy or journalist would say, this is very suspicious, why are they denying any knowledge when there is some knowledge, what are they afraid
of or are they just lying about anything. you can't take anything they say seriously. >> when you read that research document it refers to people like the russian 'em agray on trump's team. it describes people on the trump team. with you as somebody who's in the spy business, were you able to kind of guess who they were talking about. >> there's no guessing. this is called tracking back. these aren't back stop. these things have holes in it that any investigative organization could quickly fall back and determine who that individual is. russian intelligence is probably doing that right now, so people's lives could be at risk over this document. just because they just don't like the leaks. but let me touch back on that carter page moment, maybe sean spicer doesn't quite understand that despite the fact that he may not have been aware of that, it has been out there for some time that this guy was playing fast and loose. he may have had meetings with people of significance i
russia. our foreign intelligence allies don't care about u.s.itizen protection on collection. if it comes out that that guy -- there's a phone call out there on his unsecured phone that comes from the french or the germans or the ukrainians, then he's going to be appearing that he's covering up for these activities and they should be safe -- they should safeguard themselves against that and just come clean. >> michael mcfall, is it possible for a u.s. citizen, for a carter page or any other member of the trump team, to have been in contact with russians or been in and out of russia without it being known both to the embassy there, the americans, as well as to the russian government? >> well, in the specifics of mr. page, it was known by everybody. i mean, he was treated with v.i.p. status. he gave a speech at the new economics school. i think it was the graduation speech, the last american to do that was president obama. i was there with him in july 2009. so he was feted as if he was a
very senior campaign official and people wondered what he was doing there, who he was meeting with. he was rather evasive about letting people know who he was meeting with, so that he's been denounced subsequently i remind you in real time that was not the way he was being treated. but let's not leave out mr. flynn. he went over and celebrated the tenth officers of r.t., russian today, the propaganda channel of the russian government. allegedly was paid a fee to appear there. at least he has not denied that. and then sat at the table with vladimir putin. so were there contacts with senior russian government officials during the election, the answer to that is absolutely yes. >> by the way, jill stein sat at that table as well and she's mentioned in this research document. i want to ask you a very quick question each. malcolm, you about wikileaks and i want to ask david corn about
roger. what is the status of this cutout that was used by the russian government? >> wikileaks is a laundromat for russian intelligence. i think the days of wikileaks is over. their reputation is damaged beyond all repair. they're supporting trump, putin and fighting against democracy, working to undermine germany and france. this is insane. wikileaks is finished. >> you think assange will get some help from the trump administration? >> he won't get any help from the trump administration. if trump finds that it's convenient to throw him into a u.s. federal prison, then that will happen. >> what about roger stone, we don't talk a lot about him, david, but he is somebody that's been cultivating donald trump's relationship with the ussr and denouncing ronald reagan for being too tough in the '80s but turning up again. >> he noted that wikileaks was going to come out with a big leak that would change everything during the campaign, so he seemed to have some connection to wikileaks. he said he had a back channel
and knew someone who knew someone. this is what an investigation looks at. the question is whether roger stone or anybody else connected to trump was encouraging russia, knew that russia was hacking, because then you get collusion. we know that michael flynn sat next to putin. we know that carter page gave a speech and said he was representing trump, but one question is to what degree did they know about the hacking and encourage it as well. of course trump encouraged it publicly but otherwise. >> can i make one last point quickly. the most significant thing that i saw in all of this reporting that i think has been missed is there was a report that the campaign promised or people within the campaign promised to collect information about russian oligarchs who may have been in the united states. that means you are a handled asset of a russian intelligence agency and you are a collector which means you're in violation of the espionage act. >> we hope there will be an investigation and they won't be shut down by the incoming administration who can replace the heads of these natural
security agencies. thank you all very much. up next, presidential history versus the worst press conference you have ever seen. don't go away. coming up on "look! famous people!" we catch flo, the progressive girl, at the supermarket buying cheese. scandal alert! flo likes dairy?! woman: busted! [ laughter ] right afterwards we caught her riding shotgun with a mystery man. oh, yeah! [ indistinct shouting ] is this your chauffeur? what?! no, i was just showing him how easy it is to save with snapshot from progressive. you just plug it in and it gives you a rate based on your driving. does she have insurance for being boring? [ light laughter ] laugh bigger. [ laughter ] hi, i'm frank. i take movantik for oic, opioid-induced constipation. had a bad back injury, my doctor prescribed opioids which helped with the chronic pain, but backed me up big-time. tried prunes, laxatives, still constipated...
had to talk to my doctor. she said, "how long you been holding this in?" (laughs) that was my movantik moment. my doctor told me that movantik is specifically designed for oic and can help you go more often. don't take movantik if you have a bowel blockage or a history of them. movantik may cause serious side effects, including symptoms of opioid withdrawal, severe stomach pain and/or diarrhea, and tears in the stomach or intestine. tell your doctor about any side effects and about medicines you take. movantik may interact with them causing side effects. why hold it in? have your movantik moment. talk to your doctor about opioid-induced constipation. if you can't afford your medication, astrazeneca may be able to help. opioid-induced constipation. prescription opioids helped my chronic knee pain, but left me constipated. finally, i let it out. told my doctor. he said movantik may help me go more often. don't take movantik if you have or had a bowel blockage. serious side effects include opioid withdrawal, severe stomach pain, severe diarrhea,
healthcare costs are rising at the slowest rate in 50 years, and i've said and i mean it, if anyone can put together a plan that is demonstrably better than the improvements we've made to our healthcare system that covers as many people, i will publicly support it. >> during his farewell address on tuesday, president obama touted his many accomplishments including his carefully crafted affordable care act. he also threw down a challenge to the incoming administration to which trump had this response
on friday. >> repeal and replacing going great. >> and just a couple hours after that bizarre scene at trump tower, steve harvey, i mean steve harvey? anyway. the house representatives took another step toward gutting the aca with no senate filibuster in sight, but we have yet to see an actual healthcare replacement plan from the republicans. so the question remains, will that currently unknown proposal measure up to the aca if it ever materializes which has given over 26 million formerly uninsured americans access to hethcare joining me the "washington post's" jennifer ruben, msnbc analyst david corn and tara dowd. i want to play paul ryan on thursday during a rather self-serving town hall in which he tried to explain that it's kindly to take away your health insurance. let's listen to his exchange with a former republican voter
who relies on obamacare. >> thanks to the affordable care act i'm standing here today alive. being both a small business person and someone with pre-existing conditions, i rely on the affordable care act to be able to purchase my own insurance. why would you repeal the affordable care act without a replacement? >> oh, we wouldn't do that. we want to replace it with something better. >> can i say one thing? i hate to interrupt you. can i say one thing? >> yeah. >> i want to thank president obama from the bottom of my heart because i would be dead if it weren't for him. >> jennifer, presumably there are a lot of republicans who have experienced the affordable care act personally. can paul ryan and the republicans get away with using donald trump who didn't run on this as a way to get through their long-desired goal of getting rid of the federal participation in helping people get healthcare? >> i don't think so. both in congress and donald trump have raised expectations that as the president said were going to cover all the same
people, the same coverage, do it cheaper, do it better. this is a soap commercial, of course. there is no such animal. the difficulty comes in that the components that paul ryan talks about are fanciful. high risk polls do not work. >> these are state run pools where all the sickest people get thrown together. >> that gets to be really expensive and they run out of money, so that's not a solution. >> he's talking about access to healthcare. he's not talking about actual coverage. that access to healthcare is catastrophic coverage. what's one thing that the trump voters complain about? high deductibles. what is a catastrophic plan, the highest deductible. they've been so used to being in the minority and throwing this stuff up as criticism. now they've got to govern and where are the 8 democrats that are going to vote for this thing in the senate. i don't know what they're doing and i don't think they do either. >> all they can do is get rid of the taxes which means they get rid of people's subsidies but
then what happens then? >> they've had six years to do this. they've voted about 100,000 times to repeal obamacare, and they don't have a plan. they don't really care and it's all sort of smoke and mirrors and lies. that guy, you cut a little out of the introduction. he worked i think for reagan. >> and bush i think. >> and bush campaigns. and there are literally now millions not just who got insurance but mammograms, coloscopies, the fact that emergency rooms work better in your local town, this is because of obamacare. so the impacts have been not only 26 million people have gotten insurance but 50, 60, 70, 80 million or more people. they're going to take that all back and say, sorry, no more mammograms. eventually, some people are going to get ticked off if they go through this and i think they're not going to be able to pull the trigger. how do they get out of this box, i don't know. >> they do have a plan. one of them is to get rid of one of the clinics that people do get affordable healthcare from
which is called planned parenthood. here's paul ryan explaining why it's good and compassionate to get rid of the only source of healthcare for lots and lots of women. take a listen. >> do you believe in providing more choice except for planned parenthood. >> there's a long-standing principle we've all believed in. by the way, this is for pro choice, pro life people. we don't want to commit taxpayer funding for abortion and planned parenthood is the largest abortion provider, so we don't want to effectively commit taxpayer money to an organization providing abortions, but we want to make sure that people get their coverage. that's why there's no conflict by making sure that these dollars go to federal community health centers. >> tara? >> i mean, it's shameful because planned parenthood is located in many areas or planned parenthood clinics are located in many areas where people have little or no access to healthcare, little or no access to preventative health services. and one of the most effective
means for ensuring that women in particular, low income women, can come out of poverty is allowing them to plan when they are actually going to have children. so this is just ridiculous and it's shameful. with respect to the affordable care act generally, one of the things that i'd like to see democrats do more of is to talk about the act in its entirety ans totality. it's not just about which is amazing which is great and giving more people access to healthcare. it's about actually transforming how we deliver healthcare in this country and making people healthier. through the affordable care act we have electronic medical records. there are a lot of people dying because of medical errors. with electronic medical records doctors are passing information electronically which reduce is those errors. we have data to allows people to pinpoint when someone gets out of the hospital, they can get their services so they're not readmitted to the hospital which brings down the cost of care
because diabetes and chronic conditions is one of the biggest costs in our system. this is about improving outcomes. all of these things are important beyond insuring people. this is about making this country healthier which by definition will bring down costs, and democrats need to ensure that they're effectively telling this message, they're saving lives not just because they have insurance but they're getting better care. >> jonathan, one of the other things that's happening is you have now one in five self-employed small business owners are the people who are using the affordable care act, and when it comes to the increases in premiums that republicans tout as the reason to get rid of the affordable care act, the vast majority of these people are getting subsidies. so mother jones, david corn's outfit, has shown that even as premiums rose, federal subsidies are also rising, meaning that people aren't really paying the
increases. why isn't this being explained n more vigorously by democrats? >> maybe they don't know. maybe they don't have their messaging right and maybe this segment will give them the ammunition -- >> are you saying they should watch more "am joy"? >> exactly. seriously, what we're about to go into, whether it's talking about the affordable care act or whatever the trump administration does, it is going to be vital that the press keeps on top of what the actual issues are. the fact that you just asked that, folks on capitol hill and congress, democrats in particular, need to take that and then run with it. take what tara just said which is a point that i haven't heard made often enough which is it's not just about giving people healthcare. it's giving them better healthcare and now that leads to better healthcare outcomes. so just do a better job is what i have to say. >> on the point about clinics, why aren't democrats saying, you
know what, if you're going to take money away from planned parenthood, are you going to spend money building clinics because these people do not have access. >> i doubt it. >> if they want to do that they need to art putting the chips on the table. if they want to take something away, what are they going to give back. >> they don't want to. >> right. >> this is the bottom line. they've had years and years now to come up with a plan. they don't want to. they don't care. what obama did initially was take the one kind of conservative plan out there from mitt romney, use it and that still wasn't good enough. >> we have to go. tara, quickly, donald trump didn't run on this. you are the person who knows him best on this panel. will donald trump sit still and allow his own supporters to lose their healthcare, very quickly? >> i think what donald trump is going to do is they may lose it temporarily. he's going to put something back in place that will be very similar to what already exists and then he's going to call it, rebrand it and take credit for it and take credit for the stuff that's already happened understand the affordable care act. >> much like he pretends that he
i could actually run my business and run government at the same time. i don't like the way that looks, but i would be able to do that if i wanted to. >> donald trump patted himself on the back a lot at his first press conference in 168 days. first when boasting that conflicts of interest laws don't apply to him and then again when bragging about the sacrifices that he's made to avoid potential conflicts. >> over the weekend, i was offered $2 billion to do a deal in dubai with a very, very, very
amazing man, a great, great developer from the middle east. i turned it down. i didn't have to turn it down because, as you know, i have a no-conflict situation because i'm president, which is -- i didn't know about that until about three months ago but it's a nice thing to have. but i don't want to take advantage of something. >> back with me are jennifer ruben, david corn and jonathan kay parn. joining us is ali verby. putting aside the heroic decision of donald trump not to take that bribe from a foreign government, he's just a hero really, he's also said sherry dylan who's his attorney and her firm was russian firm of the year. >> in april they were named russian law firm of the year. >> here's the other heroism, law heroism that ms. dylan put forward that donald trump plans to engage in once he is president. take a listen. >> president-elect trump has decided and we are announcing
today that he is going to voluntarily donate all profits from foreign government payments made to his hotels to the united states treasury. this way it is the american people who will profit. >> ali, i just do know the answer to this. can i person donate money to the u.s. treasury? >> you actually can. it's weird. all of us can do this. it's usually meant as an income taxing. there's a box on your tax return which allows you to contribute to the lowering of the federal debt. that aside, joy, i don't like to pick a fight with you, i have grade admiration for you but a few minutes ago you said on tv that was the worst press conference you could ever imagine. it's absolutely the best press conference i've ever watched in my entire life. sherry dillon is with a law firm called morgan lewis. she's been trump's attorney for a long time on tax issues. that's by the way the law firm that ted cruz was a partner in. i've never seen anything like
that in my life. she's wrong, she was misleading. i don't like to say things on tv but i think they were dishonest. this business of donald trump putting his business affairs into a trust that's going to be run by his sons, his two grown sons and an executive who he's known for a long time, he's been involved, again, you and i can go to the bank on the corner and set up a trust. it doesn't actually separate your business interests from your decision-making, and it does not one iota address the conflict of interest concerns. this business about the so-called emoluments clause in the constitution that does actually refer to the president not taking gifts from foreign governments, this is what they're talking about. this woman, sherry dillon, the lawyer, said this wouldn't count if people stayed in hotels, foreign government took out his hotels, rented them, stayed in them. they wouldn't actually fall under the emolument clause but just because he wants to go the extra mile being the hero that
he is, he's going to calculate the profits at the end of the year and donate them to the treasury department. this was nonsensical and ridiculous and it made zero sense whatsoever. >> ali, you mean you were not impressed by the stacks of blank paper and folders? >> i've spoken to a number of reporters. no one was invited to review, authenticate, borrow, or take copies of those papers. he said these are my businesses. what does that mean? are those the incorporation documents? i have no ideas what they were. >> i think kink cos is missing stacks and reams of paper. >> listen, the emoluments clause as we've said is in the constitution. there's no exception. it not only covers gifts, it covers anything of value, a bank loan. what loans do we know that donald trump might have? not only does it include governments booking hotel rooms, it includes trademarks that are issued in other countries for
his name and his properties. it includes anything of value. there is not an asterisk in the constitution that says you can take emoluments so long as you make a big show of it, have a press conference and donate it back to the federal government. it says you shall not take it. this was central that weid not want our predent to be beholding to other governments. >> azerbaijany is having a celebration in trump's hotel and paying top dollar. one big issue that was not fully addressed at this press conference is not what he owns but what he owes. he owes hundreds of millions of dollars to deutsch bank, an overseas bank. he's in partnerships that owe a lot of money to the bank of china, a state-owned bank. you have all these banks that have an interest in front of the u.s. and he has an interest in these banks succeeding.
only a few banks have loaned to the trump organization because he doesn't pay them back. he didn't address any of that. >> look, in that clip that you showed of the lawyer talking about all profits from foreign government payments, now, are hotels like hollywood, are there really profits in hotels? and who's going to calculate what the profits are on a room that's, what, $789 a night? >> he's bumping up the prices because people weren't saying in the trump hotel and now they are. i have to say it's a little rich that he's going to check off a box on his tax returns when he doesn't pay taxes. >> who could chec who would be able to verify that? by the way, sherry dillon is the same person who said his tax returns from 2002 to 2008 are not under audit and are available for review. haven't seen those either. so we're not sure why -- he said at the press conference, you
reporters are the only people who care about my tax returns. i've been getting tweets from people all week with the hashtag not a reporter who says i live in a red state, i'd like to see his tax returns. i'd like to see him reveal them. so this constant attack on the fact that you reporters are the only people, you journalistic class are the only people who care about this stuff apparently isn't true. >> we have some numbers for that. let's go through the poll numbers from the team in the control room. pew research poll, does trump have a responsibility to release his tax returns, yes, 60% say yes, 33% say no. quinnipiac poll, is donald trump honest? would you say he's honest? yes 39%. no 53%. let's go now to pew research poll on the taxes -- we already did that. the bottom line being the american people do want to see this stuff. >> you know who doesn't care about this are the republicans. i had a conversation on friday with representative jason chaf
its who was -- >> ding, ding, ding. >> you mean renfrow? >> exactly. i asked him directly, don't you care that a week from friday the president is going to raise his hand and swear allegiance to the constitution and be in violation of the constitution on day one and his answer was no. >> he's the guy in charge of these investigations on the outside and what is he doing? he wants to have an investigation of the chief ethics officer of the united states for criticizing donald trump's sham plan. so instead of looking at what donald trump is doing or not doing, he's calling in the guy who's criticized it. so it's become quite orwellian, the guy in charge of ensuring ethics in the government is now demonizing -- >> and bullying and intimidati g intimidating. i'll read a little of what walter schaub, he gave a speech in which he said the president is entering the world of public service and asking his own
pointees to ke sacrifices. ali, i have to give you the last word in this segment. jonathan, you had a point to make? >> no. i think he's absolutely right. i want to hear what ali has to say. >> ali, the bottom line is that donald trump is showing us in a lot of ways the difference between laws and conventions. a lot of things that i think a lot of americans thought were laws were really conventions and he's flouting them all. how far can he go before he runs into a republican who will do something about it? >> the polls that you have showing are opposite of what republicans who voted for him and put him over the top who really are very concentrated on wages and economic growth if that results in higher wages. so to some degree he is still playing to the audience that says no one's been able to fix those fundamental problems, very much the same message bernie sanders was giving. if he can fix those messages then i don't really care about washington conventions i think
is what he's hoping that people will say. but it remains important that even if you think the most important thing is that your wages go up and economic growth increase and unemployment comes down and i share that view, you do have to care that there are perceived and possibly real conflicts of interest with the president of the united states that could make being president the most lucrative thing that donald trump has ever done in his entire life. >> absolutely. and i would wager that the constitution does care and i think at the end of the day we have to remember the constitution does care. hello, correct me if i'm wrongr to uphold it. >> it's a way to make some cash. >> we'll do this again real soon. coming up at noon, what's in a tweet, a closer look at the words donald trump uses most. you may be surprised. wrong. but first -- sad. who won this crazy week? stay with us.
on tomorrow's "am joy," a look at the historic accomplishments of the 44th president of the united states and the 45th president's assault on the first amendment. you don't want to miss it. up next, i'll ask my panel who won the week. ...allstate. with accident forgiveness they guarantee your rates won't go up just because of an accident. smart kid. indeed. it's good to be in, good hands. still trying to find how ara good site.going? they all...want...to... charge me. have you tried credit karma? credit karma doesn't do taxes. does credit karma do taxes? yeah, and they're totally free, so they'll never take any of your refund. oooh, credit karma...huh? we... probably still want those. yeah, good call. file your taxes for free with credit karma tax.
we are back, and now it's that time you love. time for our panel to tell house won the week. jennifer, david and johnson will tell us. >> jim mattis was the class act of all the nominees. he was direct. he was candid. he contradicted donald trump on just about everything. he won over republicans, democrats. that is what public service is all about. that's what if anyone is going to keep us on the straight and narrow. >> do you think anyone will stop him from getting the waiver? >> no. i think he will slide on through. he is the best they could have hoped for and will probably be the only with one in the national security domain that
will have the cahonis to put flynn in his place. >> i think my answer will be true for many weeks to come, vladimir putin. he is now a week away from seeing his pick in the white house he has sowed miss trust and discord here. you have republicans bending over backwards to try not to investigate a lot of the stuff and you still have donald trump doing pirouettes trying to explain the relationship which he could not. vladimir must be very, very happy. >> the right that he manages to knock off germany and france. how much trouble are we in? >> it's new cold war i think he is an ill liberal force in the country attacking democracies from prex it here, france and germany and that's bad for all political sides. >> he is not a friend. jonathan capehart? >> the dynamic duo, president obama and vice president joe
biden. president obama because in that speech in chicago, a real speech in chicago, he reminded the country why they elected him twice and why a lot of them, millions of them, probably most of them, would love him to stay for a third term and to also give comfort and realize that you have the power to hold the country together. if you would just exercise it. and joe biden won the week because -- >> he's joe biden. >> he's the most genuine person in american politics and how wonderful was it that moment when the president said would the marine guard, military aide, please come to the stage and joe realizes what's happening, the presidential medal of freedom with distinction and joe biden turns around to take out his handkerchief. you don't get more genuine than that. >> there is nobody more joe biden than joe biden. >> he is the real deal.
>> bfd. >> i wish we could have three picks. as the host i get to have three. my first one is charlie brotman, this it dear, sweet, wonderful man announcing the inaugural -- the inaugurations since eisenhower, for 60 years. he was unceremoniously dump, fired by the trump campaign. when he first heard abo it as rachel maddow reported, he was suicidal. his wife recently passed away and this was the thing getting him up in the morning knowing he was going to announce the inaugural. he has all these pictures. he has a great story how eisenhower tapped him to do his first one, and he was thrown aside. really cast aside in a horrible way. he's 89 years old. charlie has gotten another job. he is going to be the announcer for wrc here in d.c. thank you to them. charlie won the week. the second person, our friend michael dyson won the week for
his great book "tears we cannot stop." i've seen it on the desks and in hands of lots and lots of people. it's a brilliant people. i hope people pick it up. as an author myself i'm happy to promote a great book and that is a really great one. my last is a very special who won the week. it's somebody named jonathan capehart. >> what? >> oh, my goodness. >> jonathan capehart and his lovely, lovely husband you now, nick schmit, got married, and the person dabbing a tear in the middle of that lovely picture is one eric holder who married you. how exciting. >> very exciting. and for us, the symbolism of having eric holder marry us is huge. eric holder, as attorney general of the united states, who recommended to the president that the president no longer defends the so-called defense of marriage act and that memo, that letter that eric holder sent to
speaker boehner informing him of that is what started the wheels moving even faster to unwinding and making sure that marriage equality -- >> do you know what the defense of marriage is? having wonderful people like you and nick be able to participate in it and fully enjoy it. congratulations. >> thank you, joy. >> so you won the week. thank you to jennifer and david who had the hot interview, he kind of won the week, too. a whole bunch of people won the week. you won the week for watching. join us tomorrow at 10:00 a.m. eastern for more "a.m. joy." martin luther king iii on today's march on washington, and donald trump's twitter attack on john lewis. e ready when growth presents itself? american express open cards can help you take on a new job, or fill a big order or expand your office and take on whatever comes next.
fso we know how to cover almost expralmoanything.hing,ices 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 ♪ happening now -- thousands gather in the nation's capital for a civil rights march just two days before the martin luther king jr. holiday, and less than a week to the inauguration of