>> we suggest that you still your comment. we are close to 100% certain that you do not know what that means. >> happy national meatball day. first, start the official countdown clock. a source said hillary clinton might talk about [indiscernible]

president obama spoke about the controversy over the weekend and while he spoke kindly, he hardly gave her e-mail practices a ringing defense. what exactly when hillary does speak, what does she need to say or do to put this miss behind her question >> i do not think you can say anything. i don't see how anything solves this problem except for really sing every single one of these e-mails and hoping that they do not create any new problems when you do release them. that is there not something there. >> it is say and do. i agree about the do part. she has not met the press and so long this reinforces all kinds of bad narratives. she needs to answer every

question. one of those last dog dies questions. she needs to enter them in a tone of humility and humor and forthrightness. if she looks paranoid or defensive that will compound her problems in addition to her substantive problems. >> can you recall when she has done that and it has been successful? going back to the idea that playing into the narrative of what people think about her which is that the clintons work best in her happy when they are in full blown bunker mentality. >> that is true. she goes back and forth. she has had moments with the press corps where she has been charming and funny. there are a lot of moments when she has not been. the stakes are very high with this press conference. this is the first press conference she will have done with hostile questioners since she left the state department. everyone in the world will be paying attention to her style

points and i hope she falls us off. i hope she has been practicing a lot. the glare of everybody will be on her. >> and not much practice the way the republicans have because she has not had a reason to be out there. >> she has delayed starting this campaign, she has not held the painful infrastructure, she has not had a strong voice making arguments for her so the weight of the whole thing ours -- falls squarely on her shoulders. i cannot remember in this cycle so far that carries as much weight as this press conference. >> i hope she comes out and says i will put it out on the table and reporters can decide. the e-mail scandal is just one more thing. sen. chuck grassley is ramping

an inquiry into her unusual state -- hiring practice. they could work for her and work in the private sector. the clinton foundation accepted millions of dollars from middle eastern countries that are about as nice to women as frank underwood is to journalist. that issue came over -- came up over the weekend. >> there are more than 300,000 people who have country rated the work we have done over the years. and i believe we have done a lot more good than harm. and it believe this is a good thing so i am going to tell you who gave us the money and you can make your decision. >> make up your mind after that. >> clinton's tenure as secretary of state once seen as one of her latest assets, is it a liability? >> no doubt. she was at her most popular when she was secretary of state, way more than that any other time in

her career. she has been sucked back into the political fray. we have not talked about the benghazi hearings that will go on and the subpoenas coming out of that. she got a lot of problems that are going into the nexus of the foundation and the state department. >> i do not think the issue of taking donations from middle eastern countries that are not so great with women are going to hurt her when she makes acacia has been the champion of women. who else are the voters going to go to question not --? foreign policy has reinserted -- reasserted itself and there are republicans who are out there arguing in light of the e-mail scandal what is she trying to hide? the world has gone crazy and it happened on her watch but i would argue that she still has the experience and she will be able to make that case and when she was running against junior senators and governors who do

not have experience, that is powerful. >> i agree about the donors thing to a point. the women who love larry clinton will love her no matter web but if you look at this list, what she achieved as secretary of state, she did not do something big. she said i was a champion for women and girls. you look at the donations and the uae these are brutally oppressive regimes to women and makes her seem like a phony. it takes away the bragging rights of being able to say she is a great champion of feminist causes around the world. >> the clinton foundation's donation in general will be an issue. a huge issue. >> it is a rats nest. there will be a lot of digging. speaking of countries that have a rating on women's rights unless the senate approves nuclear deal he could be voided once he is no longer president.

how to set his people are obviously outraged. put aside the heated rhetoric, i am curious if you think this brand of hardball will force obama even though he does not need to legally to seek congressional approval of any deal he cuts. >> it may have been republicans who signed the letter but this is a bipartisan concern. it is bob menendez who is trying to force presidential agreement. and you have that issue on the table. there is a lot of division in congress over this. public support is very much where congress is and not where the president is. if you look at the polling there was huge support after that speech. it was a fox news poll but there

was a poll that said something like 60% of americans support boots on the ground to do with isis. the president has not made a case for not bringing in much more. >> people are being sophistic when they bring in this argument. it is maybe true but -- legally true but politically speaking this is a huge issue with global , political, and strategic implications. he has a split congress, a split senate. it will be a bad thing. he must go politically and seek get their advice and consent. he will be forced to do that. you cannot ram this thing through if you do not have the public and bipartisan support. >> this is not his strong suit. this is not what the president is good at. it is very hard to see how they will turn on a dime and say we

will work to bring everybody around the table on this. >> i agree but he must. it is one of these things were he is benefited a lot through unilateral action. republicans are in the way and i will do what i am going to do. climate change, i will do what i'm going to do. this is not one of these issues. there are too many americans who are rightly concerned about a nuclear armed you ran. you have to be able to build a case for this and have broad consensus. >> this is the common litmus test for candidates to say if you become the next president are you going to honor this deal are not and they are saying no. >> across the board. >> this weekend, speaking of republican candidates the guys who are running for president convened at the iowa ag summit that was so on the record that mark halperin stream the whole thing.

going into the weekend, jeb bush and scott walker were the front runners as of now. are there any others who qualified for that top-tier status? >> was the food good? >> not saying. >> this woman has incredible journalistic credibility. they were the front runners coming out. i do not think anyone else is in the top tier. there are some candidates who have the potential. i would say marco rubio is one of them. i think rand paul because of the fact that he has the support the hard-core supportive not the majority but a real wing of the party, not number one but he polls strong in iowa and he is

pushing up against the candidates but they are the ones who are in the zone of top-tier if not their area. >> let me ask you this about rand paul. foreign policy is asserting itself is a major issue. given where he is on foreign policy, this idea and the country was there, the fatigue from the iraq war, they are not there anymore. that will really hurt him in terms of reaching out to a broader coalition. x no doubt that the country is not wary of war. no doubt among neocons, people with hardline views, you will not win with his people but there is a part of the base that he will appeal to for sure and can he build on that? >> i agree with you about marco rubio and i would also argue chris christie. must have rallied around scott

walker and jeb bush but in this age of the super pac all it takes is one or two big donors to give you money and then it takes a breakout moment and maybe then happens on the debased -- debate stage. those two have talent in their ability to communicate. marco rubio on foreign policy has extraordinary knowledge. >> he has generational appeal. there is this -- that can be marco rubio but chris christie i am not ready to stick a fork in him. he is not right now at the edge of the top tier. he has not raised enough money and the base does not like him his staff is not strong, he is not their area. could he have that? if you months or now but not now. i am supposed to sing the theme.

americans have ideas about who should replace jon stewart. tina fey is the top choice. dennis miller came in second brian williams is down there with 7%. who you got? >> i cannot imagine dan -- dennis miller. hasn't he gone right wing? that is not going to work. tina fey. she is by far the most talented, funniest on that list. >> she is fantastic. i will watch any series she does. chelsea handler is the woman i wanted in this job. maybe if she were chelsea handler.

>> she is fantastic. she has done talk shows before which is something that tina fey has not done. chelsea handler is my gal. and someone to defend hillary clinton because he is an expert on defending the clintons. lenny davis is next. ♪

>> our guest tonight is a veteran defender of the clintons and that is why he is here with us. or more white house special can't -- lenny davis. let -- when is the last time you spoke to her? >> as the wednesday night gala of the great foundation that does a lot of great works but it was last wednesday night. >> so recently. various outlets are reporting

that she will do a press conference or do some kind of media availability to address the e-mail controversy. i am curious what you think she needs to get done at that press conference. how should she do it? >> i have no direct confirmation of that. i'm a friend and have no official status. she has to answer the question why did you do it with official and private messages on one blackberry. i am guessing her answer will be nothing nefarious because the facts do not support that nefarious interpretation. it will have to be separated out and turned over to the department at some point and that is exactly what happened. >> she is not new to this. it makes you wonder why for the sake of convenience, she knows that she has an obligation to history and the role she is into

to make sure that information is available. it is hard to imagine that you make a decision like that for the sake of convenience. >> if she knows at the time which i know she did that nothing is deletable and every thing is recoverable, the only secretary of state asked by the state department to do so is hillary clinton. she has said make them all public. there is no delete argument or fact here. i do not think she did anything illegally. the top lawyer of the archives administration quoted by "the new york times" and he said on cnn last saturday he did -- she did nothing illegal. >> it is not convenient to go and get an i.t. department to build a server at your home where you can establish a parallel in operation. the government has the e-mail

operation that is there in that is secure. the convenient thing would be the state department. she built a separate thing for i am not sure what reason. she has turned over 55,000 pages but not all of them. why should she be in the position of determining which she should retain when she currently has all control and no one has any idea. why should she be the one to make that determination? >> you said a few things i would like to take issue with. why should she be the only one? like anybody else whether it is: powell or any other secretary of state they will be asked what was private, was official. the state department system in their own private system. everyone is in the same boat. as to whether or not she will be second-guessed 90% she said when to state department people.

everyone who received it not only knew that she was using it but has it on their servers. she should say i have done nothing wrong. definitely nothing illegal according to the archives administration. >> if you were advising her what would you have said to her? would you have advised her? >> with the wisdom of hindsight and i know both of you and you know that i am always get it out early yourself. with the wisdom of hindsight immediately let everybody know you are doing this and get every possible e-mail out and then answer -- nancy to the question if the state department looks at the 55000 and they say we would like to see the 10% that we did

not seek my she has to say yes to that. she has to look at the subpoena and respond in appropriate fashion. i do not see any illegality cover-up. can i issue the -- address the issue of security? i do not think i except that her service was less secure than the state department's and if you are not convinced of that, let me use one word, wikileaks or another name, snowden. security is horribly equal in either place. >> you have a phd in clinton scandalology. where at this point he think in terms of political severity, where does this right relative to those other scandals from clinton years past? >> definitely down about where

the travel office was which is much should do about nothing but let me remind you of a major scandal, thousands of column inches, headlines, and the possibility of a criminal indictment called whitewater. that was so serious that after three years of near hysteria. >> we will help senator lindsey graham help his -- set of his e-mail account. will be right back. ♪

>> senator lindsey graham shock to the world sunday. he does not know how to use

e-mail, today, in 2015. we call the power -- called up our tech support. >> i don't need e-mail. i never sent one. >> i am happy to set that up for you. i am accessing your screen. have you thought about a username? >>a username is nothing to worry about. typing what you would like your e-mail address to be. you have typed pr esin16@senate.gov. everyone else uses their name. >> i do not agree with that at all. >> let's try sending an e-mail. type in any name.

like hillary clinton. >> did they have a private e-mail account? >> you are right. as a senator you should stay away from personal e-mails. how about we send a test to hel p@senate.gov. >> i have never sent one. >> it is the only way to effectively communicate with people in real time. sure, bcc and reply all are confusing. you have to do this. >> no. > i am not sure he is telling the truth. >> the internet is not a giant set of tubes. that is what he has to know. >> have a good one. ♪

>> where lived 24/7 on lumber politics.com. -- bloombergpolitics.com.

>> up next we have "taking stock." time for us to say sayonara. ♪

>> i am pimm fox and this is what i am taking stock of on monday, march 9, 2015. arrow finance ministers are demanding more from greece. they must follow throu with reforms in order to receive more money. gh>> it would never be completed in one day but would come to fruition day by day and way before the deadline. >> the apple watch's time has come. tim cook showed