down into your joints. take it from me. it works fast and you won't stink. blue-emu, it works for me it'll work for you. good morning and welcome to "a.m. joy." less than 24 hours ago, on holocaust remembrance day, didn't signed an executive order banning visa holders and refugees from several muslim countries for 90 days with syrian refugees banned indefinitely. while trump's ban covers these countries, which have produced exactly zo people linked with terrorist attacks, the ban does not cover countries like turkey, egypt, united arab emirates and
saudi arabia, whom trump and his family has done business. the 9/11 hijackers were mostly saudi. terrorism by muslims accounts for one-third of 1% of murders in the united states. trump's ban has already resulted in visa holders being turned back at airports. and google has been recalling its staff members from the u.s. tech companies, which rely on talent from around the world, are expected to be hit especially hard by the trump order. over the next few hours, the president will call the leaders of france and germany which have taken in large numbers of syrian refugees and russia, which has not. and while there's a good chance that the leaders will discuss the syrian refugee crisis, those calls are important for another reason. and it's related to one of the most severely underreported stories of the week, except by our own rachel maddow. in early december, senior
russian cyber intelligence officer sergei mikhalov was arrested and charged with trees on. officials threw a bag over his head and seized him during an fsb meeting. the russian news outlet claims the fsb officer is suspected of passing information to the united states. mikhalov was working with the fsb branch associated with the american election hack, which u.s. intelligence officials say was meant to help lay the groundwork for donald trump's surprise victory. as rachel pointed out, this bout of russian spy drama could be the strongest indication yet that russia did in fact interfere with our election and is already punishing those who let the cat out of the proverbial bag. this is unconfirmed news of one of the highest profile fsb arrests for treason and it comes as we await the first known phone call between donald trump and vladimir putin. kellyanne conway said trump and
putin just might discuss lifting sanctions that the obama administration placed on russia. but what did trump say just hours later? >> as far as sanctions, we'll be talking about that. we look to have a great relationship with all countries ideally. as far as, again, putin and russia, i don't say good, bad, or indifferent. i don't know the gentleman. i hope we have a fantastic relationship. that's possible. and it's also possible that we won't. we will see what happens. >> joining me now are malcolm nance, executive director of the terrorism asymmetrics project, and the author of "how to catch a russian spy." thank you all for being here, friends. let's start with you, malcolm. i want to talk about this muslim ban. this is our first full screen here, a map of the seven muslim majority nations that have been essentially banned by trump's executive order.
iraq, iran, libya, sudan, yemen. none of those countries have produced their citizens who have been terrorists linked to attacks on americans. and yet countries like saudi arabia are not on that list. can you make sense of that? >> no. i can't make sense of any of this. this is just playing into the hindsig hands of isis. i said before, this is going to be the salvation of isis. let me put a personal touch on this. all those countries that trump has commercial ties to that have sent terrorists to the u.s. at some point, we haven't had terrorists from brazil or trinidad or the bahamas, who have more terrorist members than any of those terrorist countries. this morning i was notified that an iraqi interpreter that worked for six years for special operation forces had his visa cancelled this morning in baghdad as he was about to fly to the united states with his wife and 4-year-old baby daughter. this is ridiculous. you are punishing people who
have nothing to do with terrorism and arming terrorists with all the propaganda they need to show the united states is a country of racists and doesn't care about muslims. we are going to have attacks based on this. >> the point about iraq i think is very pointed, because we invaded their country, we invaded iraq and created a refugee crisis there, created the seeds of isis there. there was no al qaeda in iraq until we went in there and sort of created it. and now people who helped us, iraqis who actually fought on our side, can't get into the united states. what do you make of that? >> you know, joy, it's frustrating. prior to this, we actually had a system that worked pretty well. the united states is not like europe, we don't have the same sort of issues that the europeans have. we don't have a porous border that allows people to come from syria directly into our country. we have two oceans protecting us. you know, we have vetting. we had a process whereby people were actually reviewed months before they even set foot on a
plane. i don't understand why that process wouldn't work. in fact if we were going to do this the right way, as malcolm said, the goal shouldn't be to turn the light off for one entire country but perhaps to build up the infrastructure that allows for review. let me just put one caveat, there are countries that it is impossible to vet someo simply because they don't have records. when someone is coming over here, you can't ascertain that person is who he or she says they are. that's separate, a legitimate security concern, to say until we can figure out exactly if they are who they say they are. but the wholesale shutting down, i don't understand from a security perspective, frankly, what it's solving. >> the aclu says, extreme vetting is just a euphemism for discrimination against muslims, identifying countries and carving out countries on the
basis of religion flies in the face of the constitutional principle that bans the government from eithfavoring countries on the basis of religion. i want to talk to to you about this, this is one of the features of authoritarian government, cowing people even on your own side who stood up to it. paul ryan said, back in july of 2016, a religious test for entering our country is not reflective of america's values and i reject it. mike pence, back in december of 2015, when trump was first talking about this, said that calls to ban muslims from entering the u.s. are offensive and unconstitutional. sarah, talk about what happen when members of the ruling party decide their old morals no longer apply. >> yeah, there has been a change in how republicans act. when you have dick cheney as the voice of reason on this policy
because he opposes it, then you know something is awry. they have changed their perspective on muslim investigavetting just as they changed their perspective on russia and russian sanctions. you've seen a dramatic shift within the gop, an unwillingness to oppose trump, who has less policy expertise, who was less knowledge of how things actually work. and that's a very dangerous situation, particularly when you combine that with, you know, what seems to be a purge or at least a large number of resignations within our diplomatic quarters, within the intelligence community. i don't completely understand the rationale for what the republicans are doing. it is not in our national security's interests. it is fundamentally anticonstitutional, anti-american way of behaving. we have always been a country that has accepted refugees. and i think it's also important to note that in the case of these particular refugees, from muslim majority countries, they are often fleeing isis. they are very unlikely to be
members of isis. they are in fact the greatest victims of isis out there. and so i think that we have, you know, a moral imperative to protect these people and to not, you know, instinctively view them as a threat to our democracy, but as people who could potentially benefit it, and as people who, you know, i think we owe that comfort and that refuge that america has always given. >> malcolm, i want to talk to you a little bit about that, you've talked about this before, the idea that isis had been on the decline, we have been degrading them with drone strikes and other things. what does it do when google, when people who are techs who work for google, when students who are studying the sciences, people who are potentially computer scientists and nurses and doctors are being turned back at the airport and fleeing home because the united states is now a country that bans muslims, what does that do to our security, our national security? >> you know, i often make a joke that i'm talking to every
intelligence watch officer in the world when i talk on television. and today i'm speaking to them. they understand that what we are doing is creating a base of support for terrorists that didn't exist last night. and when we do that, what we do is we push intelligent, educated, clever people into believing that the united states does not stand for the morals of that building right behind me there, independence hall, and that what we stand fors a form of racism and segregation and bigotry that osama bin laden and abu baker al bagdadi and other terrorist leaders have been saying for years. and when we break those values and we show we are not the united states that lives up to its values, a nation of immigrants, then what we do is we create terrorists that don't exist. i can't even imagine how many people are going to come into isis or al qaeda in the next year. but it's going to pay itself back.
and this is something that should be abandoned immediately. >> very quickly, what might in the world go on in this phone call with vladimir putin? can you even anticipate? >> no, i can't. i do want to close with one personal touch. look, as my name suggests, i can't trace my lineage back to the mayflower. my dad came from pakistan. there are three generations of my family living in the united states. as someone who has served in the military, completely a patriot, on a personal level, it concerns me that we're doing this, the message that it sends to us, that we're somehow second class citizens, that we're not loyal americans. it's a very dangerous direction that we're headed down. i hope the president makes some attempts to clarify what he's trying to do here. >> thank you for make that personal assessment. sarah, putin has a lot of the so-called alt-right turn to him.
can you anticipate what might go on in this known call with trump? >> i can't anticipate what will go on in the phone call. i'm skeptical that this is the first interaction they've had, when he's had 30 years of doing things with russia. they are aligned in this anti-muslim ideology, you see anti-muslim acons in russia. you see trump not only taking actions against innocentusli abroad but also wanting domestic policies like a registry within our own country. so they are aligned in this way. i think it's racist and xenophobic. as malcolm was saying, it's completely counterproductive in terms of national security and future protection of our country from actual terrorists. so i don't expect anything productive to come up this. >> absolutely. we always appreciate you guys coming on when we will continue to talk about this, thank you very much. after donald trump's
at age 87. the novel is about a future world where fact and free thought are suppressed and where the word "science" doesn't even exist. the book surged to the top of amazon's bestseller list after trump adviser kellyanne conway's "alternative facts" comment drew comparison to orwell's "doublespeak." in a disturbing echo of "1984"'s protagonist, trump ordered the director of the national park service to back up his claim that he had the largest
inaugural crowd of all time. this is real life and it's happening right now in washington. joining me now from an indisclosed location, authorize of "the targeter: my life in the cia on the hunt for the godfather of isis," a former cia analyst, and a former cia counterterrorism analyst and the author of "intelligence," a treat to have you three ladies, sisters from the cia. i want to ask you to react to this story. this is something that really bugged me last week, it bugged a lot of people. sean spicer, in his first press conference, doubled down on the suggestion that donald trump got a standing ovation when he sto in front of that memorial wall at the cia. i want to get you guys' reaction to that. this is the story from cbs news. they've confirmed that authorities are pushing back on the perception that the cia workforce was cheering for the
president. they say the first three rows in the front were largely supporters from trump's campaign and also sitting in the first several rows were the cia senior leadership which were not cheering at the remarks and they weren't even allowed to sit down, that's why they got a standing ovation. yours reaction? . >> it is odd to cheer and whistle during a presidential visit at the cia. i remember most of those occasions being a little bit more on the professional level, where the president is imparting his knowledge on what he expects from us, and giving us an idea of what he would need from the intelligence community. it's usually not a time for cheering for the president himself. >> and the same question, is this an occasion where you would normally see cia staff hooting and hollering and cheering? >> people would smile or they would shake the president's hand
as he came through, but not the rest. as someone who teaches on intelligence issues, this brings to mind the queion of, what is the cia's proper role and how can they best servehe american people. can they say no to a president who wants to bring his own cheering section, and should they? >> that's a good question. same question to you, susan. >> i used to be a dci speechwriter so i watched a lot of speeches at that very venue. and i never saw anything like that. i certainly never heard anything like the speech that was given to the employees. >> let me go through some of the policies that we're seeing in this administration and ask you guys as professionals and intelligence professionals, what you make of them. i'll just go in reverse order. i'll start with you, susan. trump is apparently assembling a shadow cabinet, senior aides to shadow the administration's cabinet secretaries, creating a direct line of loyalists who can
monitor and shape white house goals across the bureaucracy. rudy guiliani constructed something like this when he was mayor of new york, and he called them spies that he put in each agency. what do you make of that, susan? >> i think that's chilling. certainly at the agency that would be chilling. the agency' function is to give the president what he needs to hear, not what he wants to hear. so it will be interesting to see what happens when he gets an assessment that he completely disagrees with. does he shut the briefers out? do heads roll somewhere in the agency? >> and to you, cynthia, voice of america, which the united states has used to try to be a voice of legitimate facts and free thought and information in countries that don't have their own free press, trump is now appointing a new chief executive to that broadcasting board of governors. it's a thousand-person news operation fund by the taxpayers to the tune of $218.5 million.
we're hearing that he's putting inexperienced people in there, idealog idealogues. do you find that concept at all disturbing,cynthia? >> absolutely. people around the world have reli o voice of america to give them sort of more accurate information about the world than they're getting from their own governments who they know lie to them. and if we start lying to them too, a, we look just like their governments, which doesn't help us, and they have nowhere to go. where will they go for reliable news? >> speaking of news, this is one of the most disturbing things that happened last week. "the new york times" gave a platform to steve bannon, known to be pushing this white nationalist theory all over europe from breitbart and also in the administration, and who now is apparently saying that the media should shut up. he told "the new york times" the media should be embarrassed and humiliated and keep its mouth shut and just listen. he said he wanted to be quoted
that the media is the opposition party. i want to quickly play to you what donald trump said to david brody on cbn news, christian broadcasting network, on friday in response. >> steve bannon, one of your top advisers, just the other day to "the new york times" called the media the opposition party. do you believe that? >> i think to a large extent they're much more capable than the other side. i think the media is the opposition party in many ways. >> have you ever heard an american president called the media the opposition party? >> no. it's one thing to disagree with their writing about you. it's quite another to seehem asn actual threat, which to me is incredibly disturbing, cause freeof the press is paramount to our democracy. if you start undermining simple things like what the press is going to be able to write from an objective, factual basis, just because you don't like what they're saying, this is a huge threat, i think, to fundamentally how we function in our society. >> a lot of it is very
disturbing. it's been a pleasure to have you ladies, i hope you'll come back. thank you all for being here. up next, the revenge of the civil servants and how they're fighting back against the orwellian antics of the trump white house. i accept i'm not the hiker i was. i even accept i have a higher risk of stroke due to afib, a type of irregular heartbeat not caused by a heart valve problem. but no matter what path i take, i go for my best. so if there's something better than warfarin,
i'll go for that too. eliquis. eliquis reduced the risk of stroke better than warfarin, plus had less major bleeding than warfarin. eliquis had both. don't stop taking eliquis unless your doctor tells you to, as stopping increases your risk of having a stroke. eliquis can cause serious and in rare cases fatal bleeding. don't take eliquis if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding. while taking eliquis, you may bruise more easily... and it may take longer than usual for any bleeding to stop. seek immediate medical care for sudden signs of bleeding, like unusual bruising. eliquis may increase your bleeding risk if you take certain medicines. tell your doctor about all planned medical or dental procedures. i'm still going for my best. and for eliquis. ask your doctor about eliquis.
with not food, become food? thankfully at panera, 100% of our food is 100% clean. no artificial preservatives, sweeteners, flavors, or colors. panera. food as it should be. as the trump administration continues to blur the line between fact and fiction, there are still some intrepid civil servants fighting good fight against alternative facts. the national park service on inauguration day posted two retweets to their twitter page. one, this side by side comparison between barack obama's 2009 inaugural crowds and the much sparser turnout that welcomed donald trump. and another pointing out the disappearance of civil rights, climate change, and health care policy agendas from the white house website. those retweets posted by an employee were followed by a
swift shutdown of all of the twitter accounts run by the department of interior. the accounts were all reactivated the next day and the park service apologized for the retweets. but the silencing of federal civil servants continued. on monday, scientists at the department of agriculture were reportedly banned from releasing taxpayer-funded research to the public. that ban was rescinded the next day after an outcry from the scientific community, according to buzzfeed. but employees from the department of transportation and the environmental protection agency have all received directives about clamping down on communications with anyone outside those agencies. that wasn't enough to stop another former civil servant from engaging in some civil disobedience. on tuesday, the twitter account for south dakota's badlands national park took a stand on climate change which donald trump has denied and called a hoax. for a few glorious hours, the
account rained down a tweet storm of facts about climate change. later that day the park removed the tweets which the park service said was sent by an ex-employee. but the message was not lost. there will all be those not afraid to speak truth to power. i'll bring in my panel, including the science guy himself, for more on the revenge of the civil servants, after this break.
after civil service workers at some federal agencies were temporarily banned from external correspondence, the resistance pushed back on twitter, reclaiming the "alt" prefix in the name of truth and science. two dozen and counting alternative accounts for federal science agencies have sprung up on twitter, each providing the public with scientific facts and resisting designs deniers, one at a time. joining me are e.j. dionne,
jennifer rubin, and bill nye, the science guy, you said the "e" word in a book, bill nye, i'm going to come to you first. this is pretty amazing. you have donald trump denying that he had fewer people at his inauguration than barack obama did. and by the way, last sunday we had about three times as many people watching this particular program, "a.m. joy," then attended donald trump's inauguration, more than three times, actually. that is a numerical, statistical fact. no shade. why do people deny what they can see with their very eyes and what do you make of the rebellion of civil servants against trump? >> well, here is our problem. by "our" i mean all the citizens of the u.s. if you have an ideology, the research is pretty compelling, if you have an ideology, you see what you want to see. and there is a criteria now called science curious. and it's whether or not you're surprised by new information. and so we want to encourage
people to surprise themselves, and we strongly believe that will change their outlook, their scientific view of facts. so this business of suppressing facts, i don't think it's sustainable. as you pointed out, there are so many people on twitter, social media will overwhelm us. but it is a remarkable time, that people have this world view, and they hang onto it so strongly, no matterhat's in front of them, they ignore it. >> and jennifer, one of the reasons we called you, first of all, we love you, we love to have you on, but you were tweeting up a hail storm against what the trump administration was doing to shut down information in the government. it is orwellian, jennifer, to have the federal government tell agencies that are getting public data and doing public research funded by the taxpayers, you may not speak and you may not talk about scientific facts. >> this is what totalitarian regimes do. they commandeer science. they commandeer the truth. they spit back out false
narratives. and they then attack the messenger, whether it's the press, whether it's their own bureaucracy, so they can control the narrative. this is a very scary thing that we really have never seen from any other presidential person and any other administration. i agree with bill. it's not going to work. and in fact it's just going to spur more and more leaks. i think this is going to be a golden age of journalism. you know where to find us at "the washington post." >> you have to give your twitter handle so people can follow the leaks, jennifer. e.j., it's chilling and comical at the same time. but there is a way in which it actually could be quite dangerous, when we can't trust the data that comes out of a presidential administration. i want to play you senator claire mccaskill questioning omb, office of management and budget, director nominee mulvaney, about donald trump, if he would lie if asked to by the president.
take a listen. >> if the president asks you to not issue real data, or asks you to alter data according to his narrative, what would your reaction be? >> thank you for that, senator. the credibility that i think i bring to this job is that i believe very firmly in real numbers. my job is to tell the president the truth. my job is to tell you the truth. >> what if he tells you to say something other than the truth? do you resign at that point? >> i don't imagine the president of the united states would tell me to lie. >> is that credible to you, e.j.? >> no, not after this week. i mean, given that he has lied. by the way, it's an honor to be with the science guy and my colleague jen rubin. i'm glad you brought up data. one of the fears i have is that the federal government is actually the provider of some of the most important and accurate
data we have. and administration after administration in both parties, of both parties, have really protected all of the agencies that collect data. and this data is not only important to scientists, it's important to business people, businesses make decisions on the basis of this data. it's important to local governments. if there is any messing around with government data so that there is less of it, and this is important stuff to have, or it's no longer reliable, this is bad for everybody, or everybody except the people who consciously want to lie with numbers. and so i think what you're seeing in the agencies, conservatives always complain, civil servants are more liberal than the rest of the country, they don't like republican presidents. they probably are somewhat more liberal. but what's going on here is much more fundamental. they're concerned with a government that is opposed to the very mission of their agencies. this isn't partisan. we've had great republican epa
administrators, for example. and they are concerned with the truth. so god bless 'em for being there and insisting that if something untrue is said, they're going to be there to say no, this is the relate. >> bill, this is one of the many things that is frightening, you have an administration that is insisting on more drilling, more fracking. but we may not be able to find out what that is doing to the environment. >> well, any time you're burning fossil fuels, you authorize more pipelines, you're headed for trouble in the big picture. but in the bigger picture is this thing, you know, this word we love, "cognitive dissonance," this phrase. you have a world view that disagrees with what you observe, so you might expect, if you were open minded as a scientist, as a scientifically literate voter or taxpayer, you might expect that data would change your mind. but that's not how people are.
people on either side, the other side and this side, you double down wh down. when you find conflict, it's called the backfire effect, it back fires, you get more entrenched in your world view. sooner or later, we he we can change people. r example, if somebody believes in astrology, it takes them about two years to get over it. you have to show them over and over there's no such thing as astrology, it doesn't really work, and then they let go. but everybody's expectation that you'll let go in a week is not going to met. >> are you going to tell me i don't have a pleasing personality because i'm a sagittarius? >> do you know steve? he's a sagittarius. >> steve is a sagittarius, we're just alike. >> i can't tell you apart. you see what i'm saying? so our problem, everybody, is this doubling down, this backfire effect. so we have to work i think diligently in the science community to fight back. of course there are the facts. we start with those. but there's this human nature
thing on both sides to fight back. we have our bubble over here, they have their bubble over there, and just right now, what everybody likes to call the mainstream media is really on a cable news channel, that's really the mainest of streams. >> there's going to be a march, apparently. >> they're talking about it. >> of scientists. >> yes. people who support skepticism and rational thought, yes. critical thinking. so i am not involved in organizing it. but what they told me, and i mention "they," whoever "they" are, they told me that the women's march started out the same way. >> a facebook idea that became a thing. >> it took on a big following. that really surprised me, you know, my mother. i nate e my mother hyphenated h,
she threw her bra on the fire in 1973. the scientific community will keep fighting this fight. thanks for having me on, it's great to see everybody. >> e.j. and jennifer will come back later in the hour. thank you very much, bill nye. his book is "undeniable: evolution and the science of creation." up next, the fight by republicans to roll back decade of reproductive rights. we are the tv doctors of america. and we're partnering with cigna to help save lives. by getting you to a real doctor
wheyou wantve somto protect it.e, at legalzoom, our network of attorneys can help you every step of the way. with an estate plan including wills or a living trust that grows along with you and your family. legalzoom. legal help is here. thank you so very much to all our viewers who helped us reach a brand-new milestone. we have trended nationally every weekend for the past 20 weeks. make sure you join the conversation by putting #amjoy on all your tweets. follow me on twitter, facebook, snapchat, and instagram. last week with the women's march on washington, this week it's the march for life. stay with us.
life is winning again in america. [ cheers and applause ] >> that was mike pence on friday. he was the first vice president to address the march for life, an antiabortion rally that is now in its 43rd year. he and thousands of others celebrated the election of a presiden who has promised a supreme court justice who will overturn row v. wade. the event came less than one week after millions of women around the country marched against the new president's agenda. joining me now, jess macintosh, lindsey johnson, and kristen hawkins. thank you all for being here. and kristen, who is our new friend who we just met today, i want to start with you, because you have an interesting story. you want to both marches. you were at the women's march and you were at the march for
life. tell us why you went to both of them. >> we want to be at the women's march because the majority of millennial women are actually opposed to abortion. we thought this would be a great opportunity to start a discussion in our country about the role the abortion lobby has taken. we were at the march yesterday because we were there standing for life, there with the majority of our generation saying we want abortion to be made illegal and unthinkable in our country. >> first of all, i think lindsey made a face when you said the majority of millennial women are opposed to abortion. >> yesterday the poll came out that said 70% of americans believe in access to safe, legal abortion. the platform last week at the women's march, all-inclusive, including reproductive autonomy. >> it was not inclusive because it did not include pro-life women. so that's not inclusive. >> let's let lindsey finish. >> it was inclusive in that it was about women and people who
supported for women to make decisions about their pregnancy. whether you're personally against abortion doesn't matter. what matters is that you choose, that you support a woman's right to choose whether or not she will have an abortion. >> of course a majority of millennial women don't oppose abortion, you can't get to numbers like seven in ten -- >> 53% -- >> hold on. you're new to this so i'm going to say, kristen, you're new to this, here is the deal. we can only talk one at a time because nobody can hear anybody if you're talking over each other. >> it's important to put a pin on that particular point. if you personally believe that abortion is not the correct choice for you, obviously we're thrilled to march with you. if you then take that and extend it to other women, saying i'm going to make that choice for you, that was where the exclusivity ran out. it's about making sure we stand
up for women. >> kristen, you have a lot of conservative christian voters, donald trump won about 80% of evangelical voters, partly on this idea that he was going to make the supreme court more conservative or at least keep it the same way as it was when scalia was in. the two people that donald trump has proposed putting on the supreme court, you have a judge named gorsuch, neil gorsuch, he's a tenth circuit appeals court judge. you also have pryor, and his name is william pryor, another appeals court judge from the 1111 thch 11th circuit from alabama. if one of these judges were to get in, let's just say in your ideal situation, roe v. wade were to be overturned, what would happen to a woman at risk of dying giving birth, do you
expect that woman to die to give birth? >> abortion was illegal in our country. those statistics are false, the two abortionists who made those statistics up admitted later on they had falsified those statistics. >> i don't know -- we can't just say things that i don't know who you're talking about. do you have names of the people you're talking about? >> lincolnson and larry lather, co-founders of naral. >> if abortion were illegal and a woman were at risk of death if she did not terminate her pregnancy -- >> those cases are extremely rare. >> what should happen? >> when we talk about cases where a woman's life is in danger, at risk of death, we talk about when the o.b. is treating two patients. you don't go into that situation with saying you have one patient. you have two patients. and sometimes children are delivered early. they're delivered early to give the mother every chance of life
and also to give the child every chance of life. they don't go inside of her and dismember her child. >> you think a woman should face the risk of death in order to give birth? >> i'm not saying that. we can give her and her child the best chance at life. medical technology is astounding. one of my interns last year survived being born 21 weeks in utero. there's no chance where a woman is going to say we have to abort this child. you deliver the child and you give the child every chance, all the medical resuscitation, and you treat that child. and maybe that child won't survive because our technology is not able to sustain his or her life. but we don't go inside of her and chop up that baby or give that baby a heart attack. >> this is a really important point for why these decisions need to be left up to women and medical doctors. i think it is really critical that especially in these life or death situations, it's a doctor and not an idealogue making
these decisions. >> abortions aren't for that case. >> what about a 12-year-old who is impregnated by a relative or her father? >> i believe that child should not suffer the death penalty for the crimes of his father. >> so you think a 12-year-old should be forced to give birth? by the state? >> i think a child deserves to live. >> my specific question. my specific question. >> a child should not be destroyed for the crimes of his father. i think the decision goes back to the states. i never think a child should be destroyed for the crimes of his father. >> so roe v. wade has been law of the land for 40 years. we suspect any supreme court justice to uphold that law. i want to pivot back.
eliminating access to abortion will not eliminate -- >> women are dying today -- >> hold on. >> you have no statistics to back that up. >> there's a record low of abortion because of more funding for family planning and reproductive services. >> let's go through really quickly, we have a bunch of stuff here. the cost of what -- if we no longer cover contraception under the affordable care act, how much would an iud cost across the united states? we have a map of that. that's element 7, sorry, for my producers. this is the cost of what it will look like if we don't have the aca. next map, mammograms would go -- >> mammograms that planned parenthood doesn't do. >> just like any other health care provider. >> hold on. >> actually lindsey works for planned parenthood, so she's the
expert o what planned parenthood does or doesn't do. are you saying you know more about planned parenthood than she does? >> i read their reports that show their cancer screenings have been slashed, their prenatal services have dropped in half. while their taxpayer dollars have gone up, they've only increased their share of the abortion industry. now planned parenthood commits one in every three abortions. >> let's let her answer that. >> just like any other medical health care provider, even my ob/gyn, you go in for a cancer screening and you're referred out for a mammogram. >> you can't get a mammogram without that referral. >> exactly. >> do you worry, jess, that we're also going to get into the area where we're starting to talk about the legality of contraception? >> oh, my gosh, yes. the fact that we have a president who has been on the wrong side, on both wrong sides of this issue. >> we're not talking about
contraceptives here. >> when you said that women ought to be punished for having abortion, and he went obviously on the wrong side of the antichoice issue when he said that he was pro-choice and believed that. this is a guy who clearly has no principles to stand on here. so he's willing to take it as far as i think so is politically necessary to do so. that could obviously target birth control. >> hold on, hold on, time out, time out. we're out of time. i want to try to see if we end on at least one note of agreement. is everyone around this table and virtually, agree that contraception should be legal? kristen? >> absolutely. >> i believe certain forms can be legal, yes. >> what forms? >> i don't believe abortion causing contraception should be legal, no. >> what kind of contraception are you talking about? >> hormonal contraception. >> you think iuds should be illegal? >> i don't think they should be legal. >> interesting. >> all right. >> they put women at risk and they kill children. >> what about the birth control
pill? >> i do not think it should be legal. i think that shouldn't be legal. that's no what we're talking about. >> no, but -- hold on, hold on. you're saying that the pill should not be legal. but you just said -- i just -- hold on, hold on, kristen, kristen, kristen, we can't talk at the same time. i just want clarity. i think that the pill and" iud should be illegal, right? >> in my ideal world, yes. but i don't think that's something we're working towards in the pro-life movement. in the pro-life movement we're working towards abolishing abortion. that's why we want planned parenthood's money to go to health centers which do do contraception. >> we've gotten some real clarity, i think the american people have gotten quite a bit of clarity on what your movement wants to do. >> i'm just speaking for myself when i talk about contraception. there are a lot of -- >> and we've gotten yours. thank you very much. jess will be back in our next
hour. thank you to lindsey, who actually works for planned parenthood. much more at the top of the hour, including the push in several statements to make protesting a crime. one proposed law would make it legal to run over a protester with your car, as long as it was an accident. stay with us. special edition. this is one gorgeous truck. oh, did i say there's only one special edition? because, actually there's 5. aaaahh!! ooohh!! uh! holy mackerel. wow. nice. strength and style. which one's your favorite? (laughter) come home with me! trade up to the silverado 2500hd all star edition and get an average total value over $11,000 when you find your tag. find new roads at your local chevy dealer.
this is about our country. i didn't shed blood to defend this nation. i didn't give up literally parts of my body to have the constitution trampled on. >> we are marching to rewrite, reclaim, and reimagine the humanity that has been taken and stripped from these women. >> welcome back to "a.m. joy." nearly one week after an hitting day of national demonstrations, lawmakers in some states are taking steps to shut down
protests by criminalizing it. north dakota's legislature is currently considering a bill that would remove any consequences for a person who accidentally runs a protester over with their car. yes, you heard it right. if the bill becomes law, it will be legal for a driver to kill or injure a demonstrator who is blocking traffic as long as the collision was not intentional. the republican state senator who introduced the bill said it was a direct response to the dakota access pipeline protest. it's one of several recent efforts if states advancing policies designed to criminalize protesters. lawmakers in at least ten states have introduced legislation to restrict peaceful demonstrations. many were first introduced last year in reaction to demonstrations both by pipeline protesters and the black lives matter movement. joining me now are dallas goldtooth with the indigenous environmental network. brittany packnet, and jennifer rubin and e.j. dionne from "the
washington post." dallas, in north dakota, the idea is to allow people to be able to hit people like yourself, water protecters, protesters, with their car. what do you make of that? >> i think that honestly, this is a racist bill. i think this is a bill targeted to limit the ability of people to voice their opinions, to enact their first amendment rights. and it really is in my opinion, legalizes murder, potentially legalizes for people to take into their own hands in an act of vigilante justice, to plow through a crowd of people who are merely peacefully protesting. i'm speaking to the cases we've been seeing here in north dakota and the fight against the dakota access pipeline. i think this is the state of north dakota seeing native people, indigenous people, rising up, speaking their voices, speaking to their issues, and really talking about
protecting their communities. and the state taking the next step of state repression and to try to limit those voices, people taking to the streets. it's absurd. >> there's something obscene about the idea of native people who have already had so much of their land confiscated, have been treated so shabbily, now to be allowed to be hit with a car and killed, it's pretty stunning. brittany, it isn't just native american people. you as a part of the black lives matter matter movement, the blocking of traffic, this is a tactic that dates back decades. in indiana, you now have a republican lawmaker introducing a bill that would direct police to use any means necessary to break up mass gatherings that block traffic. and there are, as we said, at least ten states that are considering these kinds of bills. what do you make of it? >> you know, this happened in ferguson. it's happened across the country. and it absolutely needs to stop.
at the end of the day, i always find it fascinating, people are more angry with protesters and the way in which we choose to protest than the injustice that we're actually protesting. if the injustice would end, the protests would end. peaceful protest like this is the cornerstone of american democracy. an attack on peaceful protest is not just an attack on protesters. it's an attack on an american way of life, an attack on all of us who want free speech, who want the ability to protest and stand up for those rights that we believe in. >> e.j., there's this meme on the right that people who fear the trump administration are simply being hysterical, the idea that the first amendment would be suspended. but this isn't even about the trump administration, these are states, particularly republican controlled states. in minnesota, you have a bill that would charge protesters, that would hold protesters financially liable for the cost of police responses if their protests were deemed either illegal or a nuisance. let's go to iowa, people who intervention block traffic on iowa highways could be charged
with a felony punishable by up to five years in prison. you've already had felony charges against six journalists arrested at a protest which raises fears for press freedom. lastly, this blue lives matter bill in mississippi was passed in mississippi on thursday, and it would call a hate crime anyone who essentially resisted arrest, and it mimics a law in louisiana that does the same thing. are people just hysterical for seeing these as chilling on the first amendment, e.j.? >> no, and i would like to put the shoe on the other foot, which is, what would have happened during the tea party demonstrations in 2009 and 2010, if democratic legislators had introduced various bills specifically targeted toward those kind of protests? i mean, look, as it is now, if you block traffic, you can be
arrested. demonstrators who engage in civil disobedience going back to martin luther king, accepted responsibility and said yes, we could be arrested. but these are escalations aimed at particular kinds of protests with a political motivation to stop one side of the political debate. and you just can't do that. and i suspect if any of these bills ever go into law, they will be successfully challenged, because we have free speech, free press, freedom of religion, but we also have freedom of assembly, and it's really important. >> and jennifer, you know, we tend to focus on the arrests of journalists, but this is spreading that risk, not only are journalists are being arrested, and we still don't know why those journalists were arrested in the district, but this is orwellian, right? >> it really is. the aclu is going to have their hands full for the next four years or however long donald trump is in office. let me just describe how crazy this is.
your last guest wanted to ban the pill, ban the iud, on the grounds of being pro-life. and yet those same people want to pass laws that allow somebody with their car to run down a human being protesting under the first amendment? this is nuts. this is absolutely nuts. and i think it's indicative of what happens when the leader of the free world goes off the rails. not only in our country but around the world, people lose it. and i think once our president declares war on the media, then there are ripple effects that will go on long after he's gone. >> let me ask dallas and brittany, what are your plans, what will your organizations do in response? >> i think we'll continue to advocate for folks exercising their first amendment rights to protest. we're not afraid. in this world of constant fear and fear-based decisionmaking,
we're not going to give into that. we'll continue to advocate to stop the dakota access pipeline and other environmental injustice fights across the country. i think we're going to continue to work and advocate for the aclu to do their work and do their amazing b, especially in north dakota, wherehi is not just one bill. there's actually a number of other bills that are targeted to minimize the voices of those taking to the streets. there's bill to make it illegal to wear face masks or cover your face. we're talking about north dakota where in the winter you have to cover your face. we're also talking about a bill targeted to strip the relationship between the tribes and the federal government. the state wants to take control of tribes themselves. that is all happening right now in north dakota. and this is ground zero. what i feel like is indicative of this greater movement coming out of the white house. and so we can't give into that fear. we have to keep pushing for our voices to be united. >> absolutely. brittany, what are your placens?
>> i couldn't agree with dallas more. we absolutely must and will be heard. at the end of the day, water protecters in north dakota, activists in ferguson, baltimore and beyond, we are fighting for all of our freedoms, including the people who might want to run us over. so i'm hopeful that watching a broadcast like this, people might think twice, not only about not running us over, instead of running us over maybe thinking about joining us. >> jennifer and e.j. will be back later, dallas and brittany, we'll have you back in the future, be safe. >> thank you. next, the pipeline owners admit that oil spills will happen. that should work out well. more "a.m. joy" next. but i keep it growing by making every dollar count. that's why i have the spark cash card from capital one. with it, i earn unlimited 2% cash back on all of my purchasing. and that unlimited 2% cash back from spark means
thousands of dollars each year going back into my business... which adds fuel to my bottom line. what's in your wallet? they all...want...to... how charge me.xes going? have you tried credit karma? does credit karma do taxes now? yeahand they're totally free, so they'll never take any of your refund. file your taxes for free with credit karma tax.
[ crowd chants "donald trump has got to go" ] protesters gathered tuesday after donald trump signed executive orders clearing the way for pipelines that had been halted by the obama administration. supporters of these pipeline projects say they're safe but that accidents happen. just this week a pipeline leaked 138,000 gallons of diesel fuel in iowa, the equivalent of about 15 tanker trucks. a like an on the keystone xl could be catastrophic to the enormous aquifer that provides drinking water to almost 2 million people and makes the crops grow in eight, count 'em, eight states. one researcher at the university of nebraska's water center predicted that the pipine could have 91 significant spills over the course of 50 years. pipeline developer
trans-canada's own analysis puts the expected number of leaks at a mere 11. let's bring in nbc's calm perry and phyllis young, both in cannonball, north dakota. let's go to you first, cal. what are the state of the protests there, and give us what we're hearing, if anything, back from the trump administration in response. >> well, the tribe has requested a meeting with donald trump. they haven't heard back. i'll let phil update us if that's changed. i have to tell you, joy, i want to tell you what happened to us yesterday. we had a chance to go out with the north dakota highway patrol and take a look at the overwatch positions from their point of view. we were supposed to visit three overwatch positions. we managed to make it to two. then what happened is the private security company from energy transfer partners rolled up on our location, and keep in mind we were with state authorities, and they ran us out of there. they took down our license plate numbers, they filmed us on our
way out, even followed us down the highway. it was pretty impressive, the amount of intimidation they were willing to go to to send a message that they did not want us around. it gives you an indication, exactly the conversation you were just having, about the difference between the state authorities and these private security officials who now have been emboldened by this ecutiv order. it's created a lot of fear in this camp and a lot of communications problems. the local authorities, the state employees, they were wonderful to take us up to those sites. we were going to go to the drill pad. and like i said, they cut us off and ran us out of there. it was fascinating to see that the authoritative power that they had over the local authorities, joy. >> that is kind of curious. you're saying there's sort of a disaggregation between the authority of official police and these private security gouruard who now feel empowered to act as if they're police. >> yes. the highway patrol said, listen,
we're spending $30 million to keep protesters from reaching the oil platform because we don't know what the local private security's rules of engagement are. they feel emboldened by this executive order and are dead set on finishing this pipeline. >> you now have these emboldened security officials but you now have a law, a bill that's been floated in north dakota that would allow people to hit protesters with their car and be absolved of legal authority. is there a state of fear in the camp? tell me what activist and water protecters are feeling now. >> i think people are dedicated to be here, they are willing to go to great lengths. let me ask phyllis, you heard the question there from joy, what is the sort of level of fear here in the camp? >> there is some fear. but as a people, we have
survived, endured incredible odds. and we all have to brace ourselves to hold on to the principles of democracy that was founded here in indian country by our people as well as americans. we all have to be in the front line to defend those principles of democracy and we have to further define for the future, for our grandchildren, because it's about privatization of our rights. we cannot allow a wrongful conduct, an act of conduct by anyone, no less than the president of the united states, we have a treaty relationship that protects our rights, that is guaranteed under the supreme law of the land, the constitution of the united states. so freedom of the press is just fu guaraees that we have here. and i apologize in our homeland for the treatment that you have
suffered, because as i said, we're all on the front line, and we're defending our treaty right. and that to our land, our resources, and our children. and we will not allow anyone to privatize the rights that have been guaranteed by our ancestral lands that we live on. we are the predecessor sovereign of this country. and america has to secede. we don't want to put americans out because we're on the front line together. but we have to ensure the freedoms that are guaranteed to us and human rights in this country. >> well, fiphyllis young, stay safe, thank you very much. cal perry, you guys try to stay warm out there, thank you very much, we really appreciate the updates, stay safe. >> thank you. >> now i would like to bring in a farmer in nebraska and an opponent of the keystone pipeline and also via skype joining us is jane fleming
klebb, chairman of the nebraska democratic party. i want to start with you, art. one of the other things that's looming out there is the threat that not only could native american land be trampled over and seized but land that belongs to people like you. do you worry that other ranchers, yourself and fellow ranchers, could wind up falling to eminent domain and end up losing your land to these pipelines? >> absolutely. it's a definite threat. they want our land. and the state of nebraska and the governor, previous governor of nebraska, gave them that right. and we took them to court. and when they saw that they would lose, they decided to change their tune and they had actually had eminent domain filings against all of us who had decided to stand up and reject them. and now we're in the core process and we're trying to
recuperate some of our legal fees from them. but eminent domain for private gain is a disaster. i mean, especially when it's with a foreign corporation. it's not even an american corporation. you know, and they want to come in here and they want to take my land. and once they do that, i mean, they have more control over that land than i do. and for example, if i'm out there with a tractor or a combine, and for some reason it falls down in their trench, you know, their closedrench and breaks their pipe, then i'm liable for that. you know, if i happen to be out in my field with a deep ripper and it happens to touch the pipe because they didn't get it in the ground as deep as they were supposed to, then i become liable for that. and, you know, eminent domain for that type of private gain is absolutely absurd.
>> absolutely. and just to remind folks, energy transfer partners and trans-canada, the two pipeline companies that stand to profit and benefit, these are not american companies. this is not american oil coming out of the ground. donald trump can't guarantee that these pipelines will be built with american steel. these are foreign corporations. jane, you tweeted out the fact that some of the steel for the keystone xl pipeline actually comes from russia. your thoughts. >> you know, there is nothing america first about keystone xl. it is a foreign pipeline carrying foreign tar sands for the foreign export market. and some of the pipe is from russia. it's from india. and those are the two main sources of steel. the pipe is already bought. it is sitting in a field in north dakota in the snow and the extreme heat. and they expect to use that pipe, which is an added, now, risk to all the farmers and ranchers along the keystone xl
piline. americans will not benefit from this. this is not about american energy independence. this is another scam by donald trump and the big oil lobbyists that are now sitting in the state department. >> just to clarify and correct myself, trans-canada, which is doing keystone xl, is a foreign company. energy transfer partners, doing the north dakota access pipeline, the dapl pipeline, is a texas-based company, i think rick perry might have something to do with it, and donald trump had some investment in it, just to clarify that one of the two companies is not an american company. i want to stay with you for one second, jane. you also got the issue which my executive producer taught us, this thing about the ogallala aquifer, the water that runs under the ground and feeds farmland in eight states, essentially feeds the country. what are the risks? you already have the situation where there was petroleum coke from oil drilling showing up as
far south as chicago. what are the risks to art and people who live in that corridor of the united states if this pipeline were to retuupture? >> nebraska is america's bread basket. the ogallala serves not only the livelihoods of farmers and ranchers but all of us. you're talking about polluting water supplies. don't take my word, take the coast guard. the coast guard and the national academy of sciences issued a report a year ago that said they don't have the technology to clean up tar sands when it hits water. it is a very different type of oil. it's mixed with about 30% of chemicals. you're not only talking about chemicals that are going to contaminate the water. you're talking about this thick oil that literally sinks. this is dangerous. there's no reason we should build more pipelines. we have enough pipelines in america. it's literally time for us to create a clean energy revolution
so we're not risking our water supplies. >> do you have a message, art, for president donald trump? >> absolutely. for president trump, i would invite him to come to the heartland to talk to the farmers and the ranchers and our native american allies, to talk to us. let him walk our fields. let him see our ogallala aquifer that's just a few feet under our ground. let him see how these people have been so loyal, loyal americans. and like jane said, have been -- you know, it's the bread basket of america. and to come in here with this type of pipeline, to potentially destroy our water, our food supply, is absolutely ridiculous. so, you know, i would encourage him to come visit us. we're alwaysappy to do some teaching out here in rural america, where they expect this to happen, they expect to run
over us, and now he seems to expect to run over us as well. >> art, if he accepts your invitation, please give us a call and let us know what happened, we would love to have you on again. >> absolutely. >> jane, we'll invite you back as well, thank you very much, we appreciate you both. we are keeping a close watch on the many ways that donald trump is changing the way we live. up next, a look back at week one in trump-merica. if you're searching other travel sites to find a better price...
i deto get my dna testedtry so i could find out more aboumy 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. coming up next, how trump's blatantly false claim that 3 to 5 million illegal votes were cast will set the stage for even more voter restrictions nationwide. stay with us. pampers easy-ups has an all-around stretchy waistband and superior protection so you'll see fewer leaks and they'll see their first underwear pampers easy-ups
that's how i feel about blue-emu pain relief spray. odorless and fast-acting. it soothes all my muscle aches and pains. and it's convenient for those hard to reach places. and if you're like me, you'll love blue-emu super strength cream. it's made with real emu oil, it's non greasy, it's a deep penetrating formula that works itself down into your joints. take it from me. it works fast and you won't stink. blue-emu, it works for me it'll work for you.
you look at all of these different things that are happening with registration. you look at those registration -- you'll find -- and we'll do an investigation on it. >> but 3 to 5 million illegal votes? >> we'll find out. but it could very well be that much. >> okay, let's get one thing out of the way. no, we are not going to find out anything about widespread voter fraud. no, there could not be 3 to 5 million illegal votes because this is yet another alternative fact that donald trump has made up out of thin air. in fact, the voter fraud claim is so preposterous that republican lawmakers who are in lockstep with him on everything else are for once choosing truth over trump. >> reporter: does it trouble you that he continues to hold a belief like this that isn't based in fact? >> look, i've already commeed on that. i've seen no evidence to that effect. i've made that very, very clear. >> i think this is a huge distraction from really what we ought to be focusing on, which is getting the president his cabinet so he can get to work
for the american people. this really seems like a rabbit trail to me. >> this is a president who is claiming electoral fraud in a massive fashion to reconcile the fact that he did not lose the popular vote when in fact he did. i am begging the president, share with us the informs you have about this, or please stop saying it. >> that sentiment was echoed even by ohio secretary of state john usted who has spent a lot of time and tax dollars in a fruitless quest to find systematic voter fraud. which is why republicans rejecting trump's vote fraud lie feels like a whack with the irony stick, because usted and other state officials have for decades used the myth of white spread voter fraud as a justification for voter restrictions. joining me are the director of the voting rights project of the
aclu and the executive director of the advancement project's national office. dale, the statement from the nation association of secretaries of state. they said, we are not aware of any evidence that supports the voter fraud claims made by president trump in the leadup to the november 2016 election. secretaries of state expressed their confidence in the systemic integrity of the election process and they stand behind that statement today. if republican secretaries of state like john usted who engage in voter repression, some would way, where on earth is donald trump getting his alternative facts? >> not from any reputable source. his own legal team said in court filing th, quote, all available eviden suggests the 2016 election was untainted by fraud or mistake. that's a quote from the then-president-elect's legal team. he's not getting this from any
reputable source. the only evidence he points to are people who are registered to vote in more than one state. >> like his kids. >> which happens to be true of tiffany trump, steve mnuchin, steve ban non, jared kushner. that's not evidence of fraud. it's evidence of having an election system that is decentralized. >> what they're talking about is somebody standing in line and voting and then getting back in line again and myself going in line after voting as joy reid and then saying, hi, i'm dale, i'm voting again. does that ever happen? >> there are a total of a few dozen cases of this happening in the last 15 years, a period of time in which over a billion ballots were cast. last year there were four reported instances of voter fraud, one of which was a woman in iowa who voted for trump twice. >> there you go. judi judith, one of the things that drives me insane is the low rates of voting once, right?
so the pew research center has looked at voting data. the united states is 27 out of 35 countries, registered voters here represent a smaller share of our voters than just about any other developed country. we are at the bottom in terms of people voting once. so nobody is doing it twice. people don't even do it one time. but at the same time, when donald trump is saying this stuff based on conspiracy theories that he's cooking up from disreputable people, what are the real world implications of him saying it? because real things can happen as a result. >> right. we need to understand, joy, this is really about his ego, just like the inauguration numbers, he wants to go out and prove he had more people. now he wants to prove that he lost the popular vote because of illegal votes. well, in fact there is no evidence of that. and s the real implications, though, are that those who actually do want to make it harder to vote will use this as
an excuse in order to pass restrictions in the states. and at the end of the day, he wants an investigation, we should be saying no to the investigation. when the mayor of crazy town asks you to get on the invisible ride, you should say no to that. and i think that's what republicans are saying. secretaries of state who run the elections, his own legal team, everyone knows that this is propaganda and it must end. >> dale, brian stelter, over at cnn, he tweeted that donald trump got this from this conspiracy theorist who says that obama is causing voter fraud. the real implications of this is you see these same secretaries of state saying there's no voter fraud suddenly go out and use this as an excuse to stop people
from voting. >> that's the concern. throughout history specious allegations of voter fraud were used to suppress voting. they were used to justify poll taxes, literacy tests, and if you have a concealed weapons permit but not a student i.d. card. >> do organizations like yours have the resources to go state by state, potentially 48 or 50 states, to fight for the right to vote, when you don't have a justice department that is on your side or that maybe won't even exist by the time trump is done? >> it's hard to do. we have a lot of resources pouring in. we'll be fighting state by state. the department of justice, which has been a staunch ally in the invite for voting rights over the last five years, we don't know if they'll still continue to be that. >> judy, you've had the trump administration put out a list of parts of the government they would like to seriously cut funding for and even eliminate. the civil rights division of the justice department is on that
list. how concerned are you that essentially civil rights groups will be fighting with one hand tied behind their back because the justice department is now an enemy rather than an ally? >> yes, we've had them as a partner in the last eight years, including the litigation we did in north carolina, they were on the right side in texas. we expect they will change sides in those cases. but also that means for civil rights organizations like ours, that we are going to have to be the front line lawyers. we've been that, but we're going to hto dble down on that. we're already starting to see bills in state legislatures cropping up that are about making it harder to vote and voter suppression. we're going to have to fight in all 50 states. unfortunately the federal government will not be on our side. >> dale, do you think the rest of the voting rights act is in jeopardy? >> i certainly hope not but i wouldn't put anything past this administration in terms of nonenforcement. you can kill a statute not by attacking it but just by
refusing to enforce it. >> scary times. i hope you'll come back to talk about this more. thank you very much. in the next hour, the consequences of the trump administration banning immigration from seven muslim nations. legal challenges are already being filed including by the aclu. and oh, donald trump will be picking up the phone to call vladimir putin in a few minutes. that should work out well. stay with us. will your business be ready when growth presents itself? american express open cards can help you take on a new job,
hey, friends, an actual fact as opposed to an alternative fact, "a.m. joy" is the number one trending topic in america. thanks for tweeting and keeping using that #amjoy. and pick up my book, "we are the change we seek," a compilation of president barack obama's speeches. i have to give a shout out to the woman now officially the
statistic from her own organization to claim that millennials oppose abortion rights. they published that 53% of millennials say abortion should be illegal. but we like says that 60% of americans between the ages of 18 and 29, that would be your millennial, believe abortion could be legal in all or most cases. time to ask my guest who won the week? let's go around. ej, who won the week? >> two groups and a constitutional amendment. the group are whistleblowers. we've talked about them all show. they are in the government. shall be who leaked that tape of the republican meeting, will be meeting of republican senators and congressmen,be who leaked t the republican meeting, will be meeting of republican senators and congressmen, good a great service and i think whistleblowers will be important. the other winner is the 25th amendment which is about replacing a president in case of disability. now, trump supporters out there,
i' notinvok invok invoked. i'm saying only because i never in my life heard people talk about it so much. it's a sign of divisions in the country and also how erratic this first week seemed to a lot of people. >> yeah, it's amazing because you've had the obama administration which was very leak-free. one of the frustrating things for journalists was even if you had friends in the administration, getting any information out of them. they were a tight ship. have you seen in recent presidencies anything how leaky this was? >> no. and i think there are two sources. one as we talked about civil servants who are appalled by some of the things that are going on particularly the suppression of information. but also i think there are real divisions inside the trump white house. i think the bannon wing and
reince priebus ring are different. >> and a twitter account claimed to be from a mid level white house staff. it talked about the in-fighting. very interesting. sgrer jennifer, who won the week? >> i want to give a shout out to the emoluments claw whi s claus. and my winner of the week is sadly china. as the president pulls out of tpp about and continues to throw shade the eu and on nato, as he goes to trade war with next he company, china is the beneficiary. they're expanding their trade union in the far east. the german vice chancellor announced that he is seeking a free trade deal with china. and this is what happens when it's, quote, america first which is really trump first. there are other powers who are going to fill that vacuum and they're not going to be powers that are friendly toward our values or our security interests.
>> and even people on the left who oppose tpp about, items fine to oppose it, but you don't walk away from it without negotiation. if you have a moment, google a man of the united states and check out the country with mexico. that thing that is on one side of that country? that's the pacific. so they can also engage in either bilaterals with china or this new trade pac that china is about to launch that will replace the tpp. so this will be really great and an amazing trade war. let's go to jess. who could have possibly won the week more than china? >> i think it's women as leaders of the resistance. women have been doing the organizing work in the progressive movement forever and this was the week that they came out of their secret facebook groups and into the streets. and we saw the largest global demonstration in history with over 4 million people marching across the u.s. and not a single arrest. which i think is the biggest
evidence ever. put women this charge. >> and this is one of the challenges going forward. the original march did not centralize women of color in the way that they could have. do you see further cleavages in this women's movement? >> i think the march happened organically and the fact that it was taken and corralled by strong women of color who are always the people who are the most marginalize and doing the most work in these circumstances, i think the fact that that many white women came out for a march that was organized by women of color is something that ought to be celebrated and i do think there was a lot of education going on in that crowd. i think they were marching alongside people that they never have before and i'm very hopeful that we continue having this conversation. i love the inclusivity of the march's platform and reali real think it will continue and we're a lot louder than we were before. >> could i say something about that, too. because i was down there and what really struck me is how
nonsectarian in political terms the march was. the left isy good at form position circular firing squads and say this issue takes priority over that issue. and it was really remarkable among the people in the march, there were people representing a lot of different issues in the anti-trump movement and i think it will be very important take a lot of people who are not necessarily on the left are very disturbed by challenges to basic democratic rights under trump. and i think it will be important to have this sense of inclusivity that you really felt in that crowd. multigenerational, families marching together. it was a fascinating moment in political organization. >> and jen, there have been interesting coalitions formed. look at us here right now. you're having left/right coalitions. essentially it comes down to love of constitution over party or love of party over country essentially. and that is the division now not
left and right. >> that's right. and what truck struck me about march is there were people carrying signs protesting trump's relationship with putin. that is something conservatives of good faith can get involved in. there were people who were marching objecting to his foreign entanglements, citing the constitution. listen, i think this is an all-hands on deck time in american history. and there have to be things that right and left, people of goodwill can understand and agree upon truth for one. the constitution for another. support for democracies, not for totalitarian regimes. and i think there is a commonalty from center right to center left that is very powerful. and if they can keep themselves together, i think they will be a force to be reckoned with. >> it may not be sunday, but you can get an amen on that. all right. that is our show for today. thank you all. join us again tomorrow at 10:00 a.m. eastern for more "a.m. joy."
up next, my pal sheinelle jones is here with the latest on the phone call that is set to take place any minute between donald trump and the home office, i mean vladimir putin, at this hour. maybe shady. stay with msnbc. "how to win at business." step one: point decisively with the arm of your glasses. abracadabra. the stage is yours. step two: choose la quinta. the only hotel where you can redeem loyalty points for a free night-instantly and win at business.
bounty is more absorbent,mom" per roll so the roll can last 50% longer than the leading ordinary brand. so you get more "life" per roll. bounty, the quicker picker upper breaking news at this hour. president trump reportedly calling russian president vladimir putin, part of a day of sweeping outreach to a number of leaders worldwide. hello, i'm sheinelle jones in new york at nbc world headquarters. it's 12 noon in the east, 9:00:9:00 in the west. first other breaking news, the first people reportedly detained as a result of president trump's executive order banning immigrants from coming into the u.s., it affects acceseven different countries. more on that from the white house in a minute. meanwhile new pictures showing president trump speaking on the phone with angela merkel from