mark: i'm mark halperin. john: and i'm john heilemann. and with all due respect to donald trump's wall, it looks look just like the mexicans may have claimed away in. donald trump: that could be a mexican plane right there. they're getting ready to attack. ♪ john: on the show tonight, a tarmac chat. a beef steaks flat, and a former british at. but first, donald trump's new campaign tech. he did something remarkable today, he sort of also acted like a normal presidential candidate. donald trump held an event in

manchester new hampshire this , afternoon where he delivered a scripted speech on trade policy. remarks,d his reporters like us were flooded with press releases from the trump campaign filled with facts and figures to bolster trump's message and reinforce his remarks. donald trump when you have large : numbers of unemployed, blue-collar workers, incomes go just -- gountry, not down across the entire country. when you force them to compete with those earning one dollar and our overseas, our whole standard of living goes down. so are middle class has lost 10% since 1970, and gdp controlled by workers has steadily declined and shifted to corporations. so we became the richest economy in the world with of the biggest middle class in the world by becoming the biggest producer in the world. once unlike what was

standard practice not a single , station had trump's event live today. does this make it seem like a normal political operation, how is it working out? mark: the press and a lot of people in the democratic party are obsessed with trump's campaign. well? es this mean yeah the radio moniker, they are not doing perfectly. this is much better, a much better even where he goes to an andt, and anonymous arena, local coverage at a minimum will get more on message. this is a powerful message today. we have a big trade deficit. it is not perfect, not nearly as good as the clinton campaign but , it is better, with a chance of winning. john: i actually think given how bad it was just a week ago, 10 days ago, given how little there was of any of the standard scaffolding of a presidential

campaign, i am actually surprised how fast this turned around to the point today where if you did not know any of the , history of how bare bones that operation was and you just dropped in today, you would think you are in a normal presidential campaign. again, in terms of like a reporter covering it that inflow , i mentioned before. the event was a normal event today. i did not think it was particularly great, but it was normal. mark: and the message of, the elected deficit, the trade deficit, do you like what is happening to american manufacturing jobs? do you like what has happened to incomes? if you do vote for status quo , politicians, if not, vote for change. it is his core message and it is an economic message, not responsible -- impossible for hillary clinton to respond to, but difficult. john: you can diagnose all the problems in the world, but trump , what he does not have yet, which is harder than putting up press releases, is an actual

agenda with real policies, real solutions, things that will solve any of these many problems he identified. it is a good first step, but unless you have those things, big deal. mark: his only chance of winning is to make a referendum on the status quo, if he can do that, moreee, he will need specifics, but not many more. that is not a key part to his chance of winning. john: i still think it is very important, given the stuff he is saying, would make the problem worse. mark: the clinton campaign is getting blowback for an ordinary and in another way, extraordinary private conversation on monday between bill clinton and the attorney general of the united states, loretta lynch. that meeting took place at a a parked plane on the tarmac at the phoenix airport while both clinton and lynch were visiting the city for separate reasons. they both said it was a chance meeting, and that their conversation was only about family and other personal matters. the encounter though raises questions about the ongoing justice department investigation into hillary clinton's private

e-mail server while she was secretary of state. the conversation stared clear of anything having to do with that case. some democrats criticize her judgment allowing the former president to get on her plane and have a private talk. donald trump went further in his criticism this morning on mike gallagher's radio program. mr. trump: it was really a sneak, something they did not want publicized as i understand. , >> it is. mr. trump: i just think i think , it is terrible, it is so horrible. i think it is the biggest story one of the big stories of this , week, of this month, of this year. i have been talking about the rig system, how it is rigged and , this is terrible. >> there is your example. mr. trump: you see a thing like this, even in terms of judgment, how bad a judgment is it for him or her to do this?

i mean who would do this? , mark: again, trump is not the only critic of that meeting. democratic senator chris coons of delaware said that did not send the right signal. josh earnest talked about it. press secretaryjosh earnest talked about it. he was asked a lot of questions, he deflected them. i have heard from democrats that roll their eyes and say it was the case of poor judgment. but will it be forgotten, or will this somehow continue to be a lingering problem for the clinton campaign? john: it is hard for me to judge whether it will be a lingering problem, but there will be a lot of runway with the -- mark: runway, tarmac. john: but look bad judgment, , horrible judgment. i do not think it is a partisan point to make. bill clinton should not be having a private conversation with top law enforcement officials when his wife is under investigation. loretta lynch should not be having of president -- having a conversation with the former president in a private setting. i am more than willing to give them the benefit of the doubt,

but none of us will know what actually happened, and that just casts doubts on it, it raises suspicions. conspiracy theories are running wild. it is just bad, dumb. mark: here is the big problem. if hillary clinton is not indicted, they will say president obama covered it up. they have taken extraordinary steps, there will be nothing even, just a statement saying the investigation is over. no indictment, nothing happens. this will add to the partisan and on the decision, not unnecessary, it is so unnecessary. if fbi agents start to leak, and here are all a things, people will say, yeah, the fbi wanted to indict and loretta lynch squelched it. and by the way, she met with bill clinton right before she squelched it. john: i agree it could be a big problem if the fbi starts to leak and they have credibility.

that could be a problem. this i think, i am always just focused on who are the movable voters in the electorate. the people on the right were going to vote for trump, they will think there was a conspiracy one way or the other, regardless of this meeting taking place. and they will vote for trump. people for clinton will vote for clinton. no one is going to look at this in the middle of the election. mark: i think you're underestimating the intensity. john: maybe. mark: in terms of turn in. john: it is high season for beef states speculation, which means reporters are spending their days digging up as much as possible on 2016 running mates. one person on hillary clinton's shortlist, we are told, is dealing with a less than flattering headline. the politico is reporting that virginia senator tim kaine is seen by many as the front-runner for clinton as a running mate, and he accepted $160,000 worth of gifts and paying for travel expenses. a lot of these exposures are not

really new, but until now, they have not really gotten national attention. his office went beyond the requirements of virginia law disclosing the threshold. he is confident he met both the letter and spirit of virginia's ethical standards. this story is a reminder that many of the people on trump and clinton's vp shortlist will have some potential liabilities and some political baggage. chris christie has bridge gate, and now tim kaine has this. so my question for you is, how does this flap compared to the likely political problems that come with any running mate choice? mark: if this is the worst thing in tim kaine's vetting file -- he will be picked. it is reminder everybody has this. if i was him, i would be concerned about where did this , story come from? i don't think "politico" found it on their own. and so the question is, did it come from a rival democrat, a republican? was it afloat by the clinton

folks? i would be concerned. john: i 100% agree with you. if you compare not just bridge gate for christie, but other things we reported on in double down in christie's history, the romney people, the pause, there is a small stake. are more vetting problems with the people trump is considering than the people clinton is considering. but it is clear the knives are now out on both sides. the republicans are going to try to take out everybody on clinton's shortlist over the next several weeks. mark: i was surprised, but they do have an equation for a lot of the stuff. it shows you in this populist age, this can be a problem. a few years ago, no one would have cared. the current environment, yes. we have debated which donald trump poll numbers one should pay attention to at this point in the race. they are national surveys, which

trump is not doing all that well for the most part. and then there are battleground state poll numbers, where trump is, for the most part pretty , competitive. lately we have been noticing another bit of dissonance things , like his favorability and his traits, that would make anyone else seem like a dead man walking, and get trump is a still in the race despite bad numbers. a fox news poll has hillary clinton beating donald trump 44% to 38%, but that is still within the margin of error. hotheadedhe phrase describes donald trump. more than half of republicans, this is incredible said the repair for someone else as -- they would prefer as someone else at this point. that is not a great number. john, which numbers are more important, leading indicators for donald trump? is it the horse race number, or are these traits, which are

problematic? john: if you ask the question, why is it now in a lot of the polling averages that on a national basis trump is still on , the margin of error, but dropping, the trendlines are bad for him, and some of these are playing large, and others are worrying? the traits seem to be driving it. if i were him, there are places where hillary clinton is behind. trump should be worried about these traits mark: for sure. hotheaded may be a good thing for some people. -- mark: hotheaded may be a good thing for some people. the fact that so many republicans want somebody else is not good. what will it take for trump to win? i think he can win with all these bad traits. i think whoever is elected will have a lot of warts. the press focuses a lot on trump's warts. but clinton, we are used to decades of thinking people do , not necessarily trust of the clintons. john: unless you think trump will succeed in bringing new people into the process, unless

you believe that, he has to get over 90% of republicans to vote for him. and right now, it is not that a lot of democrats hate trump, they do. the question is, with republicans, he is way underperforming, and that is because they think negatively of things. he needs to change the view of republicans. mark: he needs a strong debate. coming up, ironclad clinton. we look at the imperviousness of both presidential candidates to criticism and scandals. ♪

♪

mark: if there is one thing we know about this unusual presidential race, it is that both presidential candidates have already faced a truckload of flak, but it does not stick the way it would stick to normal previous nominees. we talked about bill clinton's tarmac conversation with loretta lynch, but that is only one of the covey of negative storylines the clinton campaign has been dealing with in the recent past. if you have not been keeping track, we have got you covered. >> clinton controversy, here is what happened. benghazi investigation, ongoing. private e-mail server investigation, also ongoing. top clinton aide deposed. boss' private e-mail server got in the way of work, frustrated. bill clinton and loretta lynch themhat meeting, quiet to looks bad. , finally, super pac received $2000 innton, received

bond donations. declined to comment. mark: both clinton and trump would argue that they are hounded, but most of these are not sticking. going forward, what does it take, what will it take for these two actually stick to clinton and dominate her game in a negative way? john: if one of the people around her or if she got indicted, if the justice department came out and said her server had been hacked and present by material had been exposed to foreign hackers, those would obviously break through. there is a whole mass of things, the press anything that relates , to the clinton foundation. something like where there is some clear link between between dollars and something she did as secretary of state those could , break through. but the bar is pretty high, because people have course highs when it comes to clinton cost scandals. -- clinton's scandals.

mark: republicans say it is the worst thing that happened in western civilization, the democrats all circle the wagons. i think the bar is pretty high. i think, you know the benghazi , hearing failed because it was totally partisan. this thing today with bill clinton and loretta lynch, you you had chris coons, david axelrod and other people being critical. democrats think it is problematic. john: let's not underestimate the extent to which these things have stuck to her in a long-term way. her honest and trustworthy numbers are horrible, horrible. this last cbs poll has are close to, 70% of people saying she was not honestly trustworthy, and that is all that i chelated. mark: one of the things we talked about has not dominated television, and that is surprising. let's talk about trump. john: trump is of course, no stranger to scandals.

his team is facing a trifecta of unflattering stories this week on his business seminars, his charitable giving, and on soliciting for donations. once again, we will catch you right up. >> donald trump headlines, the bad ones. here is what happened, charity, trump says he gave the million, washington post said, not really. >> he is not given his own foundation since 2008 any money. >> as far as we can tell, yes. >> e-mails, the campaign listed donations from foreign nationals. one accusation comes from paul ryan, not that paul ryan, that paul ryan. who says it is a no-brainer that it violates the laws to send these two members of the foreign government on their official foreign government e-mail accounts, and yet that is , exactly what trump has done. repeatedly. trump institute? no, you're thinking of trump university. different venture, similar controversy. >> it is a great place to meet people, they are like you. they are smart, intelligent, and in some cases, beautiful or good-looking. >> according to the new york

times, he lent his name to a seminar series with a steep price tag. they leached 20 pages of their teaching materials from obscure magazine published in 1995. >> here's johnny. >> in trump got good press when 2008, he tried to save bill mcmahon from foreclosure. according to the bloomberg reporter that did not really , happened. >> that did not really happen. >> trump did not end up buying the house, some other rich guy did. still, he takes credit. but he brought attention to the dilemma, and mcmahon never lost his home. john: so i ask you, judging the little clip we had here, a lot of things about trump's controversies, what is the bar for him? mark: as much as the clinton campaign should be grateful things do not stick as much as they used to, i can understand their frustration. they plan a story, it would appear, the new york times front page about the trump institute. i have not seen this anywhere on

television. that story has got a million hooks, a million angles -- john: it has got later is. upfront plagiarism. mark: and profiteering. but almost no pickup. i cannot tell you what it will take. donald trump, same way as running the republican, the press is to blame for some of it. voters, whatever. man, the bar, i cannot even tell you what the bar is. donald trump himself said it best. he could go on fifth avenue and shoot somebody and would not necessarily cost to many voters. john: i don't think that is necessarily true. mark: up next, details from a republican strategist, a libertarian, a novelist. we will talk to both of them. just a minute. ♪

♪

john: welcome back, we are pulling up to alliteration station. our next to guests mary matalin, , a political strategist who recently joined the libertarian party, interestingly on this , program. and stuart stevens, eight former -- a former campaign strategist from mitt romney's campaign. and the author of a brilliant and extraordinary well-timed new novel, "the innocent have nothing to fear." about a contested political invention -- convention. [speaking simultaneously] stuart: i think the olympics should be in one place, i think and new orleans should be the place. mark: i agree with that. let me ask you this question. john: beyond the obvious political value, as an actual political practitioner and strategist, what advice would you give if any of that happened at this point. toart stevens: pretty close

zero. i don't see of that happening sort of plump -- trump completely falling apart or deciding he does not want to run. i find that exceedingly unlikely. john: so you have given up? there is no one to stop them now apart from the general election? stuart stevens: the guy is going to be the general nominee. john: you agree with that? stuart stevens: yeah. mary matalin: today, but the forces are not going away. if he can't be stopped, he could be blocked at least philosophically, that is the point of libertarianism, i'm not trying to make a statement. there are a number of people, and increasingly number of people vocal leaders in the , party who are saying, give us something. give us something, some semblance of a reflection, of the philosophy and principles that once were part of the republican party. john: so donald trump came to you and said, what should we do,

what would you do? mary matalin: i would not do it. you know my opinion, the party is already in peril. that would just accelerate its demise. but i would say to continue advocating for the principles. you can see some of his speeches to the extent, teleprompter number two. we are hearing some echoes of some things you recognize as potential conservative philosophical tenants. mark: trump doing any damage to the party right now? stuart stevens: i think he is doing tremendous damage. is, ifhtmare scenario what happens with hispanics, mirrors what happened with african-americans in 1964. before, you have talked about this republicans would get 30% before 1964, of american -- african-american

votes, which is not great, but better than what we are getting now between 5% and 10%. , if that happens with hispanics in this election for republicans, it is a generational disaster. that, i don't know how you recover. john: stuart stevens, mary matalin. that was a short block, we have a longer one coming up. stick around. we have a lot more to talk about with both of you right after this ♪ you guy's be good. i'll see you later

[ bark ] [ bark ] bye. see ya pal. ever wonder what your pets do when you leave home? [ laughing ] aw you cutie pie. aw. aw. aw. aw. [ barking ] [ washing machine running ] party's on! know what your pets are up to with xfinity home. xfinity. the future of awesome. see the secret life of pets, in theaters july 8th. ♪ mark: back with two very accomplished people, mary matalin and stuart stevens.

mary is technically not a republican. tell me something you wonder about donald trump? mary: i wonder what his north star is. i take the point, and i'm internalizing that he is not political. he is not ideological. i do not understand what his north star business, if that is his north star, what is his economic north star. i appreciate some parts of his speech the other day, the globalization, the multilateral, but if he wants to go back to the constitution, he needs to understand the reason we had tariffs is because we did not do taxes, we just came out of a war and we wanted to stimulate credit. he is not even using that template as a basis of his economic transition in this new, global economy. in this new paradigm. mark: stuart, same question, what is something you wonder

about him? stuart: why is he so emotionally unstable? he is incredibly insecure. what happened to him? he is someone that has been given everything in life by virtue -- had every advantage in life, and yet he seems to be constantly feeling like someone is treating him. -- cheating him. i do not understand that. something happened. i don't think it is anything at age 70 you are going to fix, but it is sort of, in many ways, sad to watch. mark: like somebody took his flight away from him or something. [laughter] stuart stevens: he loves citizen kane. maybe it could be a rosebud thing. it is a terrible quality. mary: but i think we psychobabble too much. every person we know, and we have known each other for decades do you know any person , political person that is saying, no, we are all nutty in some way. the most brilliant people we know, his manifestation is some

of his whatever he has, he clearly has something, we don't recognize it, so we call it insecurity or narcissism. something like that. i judge him by his kids. i mean, maybe that is, but america sees it as well. mark: he does last out of people that is unusual in a way for people trying to win support. mary matalin: we know a lot of other people, friends of ours, dear friends of ours, husbands that lash out when they don't understand how their words are falling. i think he is getting that. john: do you think donald trump is as emotionally and temperamentally stable as george herbert walker bush? mary matalin: no, i thought w was -- john: either one of those bushes? take your pick. mary matalin: i think he is very theatrical and knows more about what he is doing that we give them credit for. john: you believe donald trump will lose the election badly? likely to elicit?

-- lose it? stuart stevens: the probability is, because of the reasons you are talking about earlier, where he is not coalesced the republican vote. the margin of error for a republican to win nationally is so small that you have to do an inside straight of an inside straight, and there is no reason to believe that he is on track to do that. john: and you think he can win? mary matalin: i think he can win and win big. you are going to want this to go by the conventional templates that we know. and this is sort of of rumsfeldian we don't know what we don't know. it is a whole different paradigm. you do not know when you are living through a new paradigm. we are running against an incredibly we, incredibly high negative, can't get over, never will be loved person who thinks that money and machine is going to be trump. it is not about trump. if we hear him like we hear him, the people supporting him will

never support her, are hearing, we talk about immigration, they do not hear that it is racism. about profiling or syrian refugees should not be allowed to be vetted they do not , see that as bigotry. he has somewhere to go that people want to go, and she has nowhere to go. it is just a different dynamic. if you want to go state-by-state, it is too early for that. she should be way ahead of him by now. dukakis was way ahead of us in whatever year, it was 88, ok. they are all merging together. [laughter] what istevens: here's like about it, there are four groups of voters. in simplistic terms, men, women, white, non-white. so you have to say, its rich one will donald trump do better than romney, because there was a reason he lost. and which one will she do worse than obama? somewhere in there, that is all we got.

where is it going to be? that is why i would look at white women, romney one white women by 14 points. what it will be in all probability, you need to move that closer to 20 if you are republican. right now, he is what, breaking even with the white women? so you are way off. maybe he does better with white men, but he has to do a lot better, because romney did well. it is sort of like baseball. it is easier to go from 250 to 450 then 450 to 550. he really has to start hitting 600 or with certain groups. 700 mary: that is a demographic destiny model, that is not -- mark: you agree with that, an entire electorate can be defined that way, everyone is either a man or woman or white or not white? mary matalin: well, you can be somewhere in between now.

you can have your own bathroom now. hispanics are not homogenous thinkers. women are not homogenous -- millennials are not supporting, i am woman, i am strong just because she is a , woman. i have two young women, daughters, who they vote on what they like or do not like based on policies. there is not a level of homogenous thinking in this very volatile, to use an electric word. which has been volatile for some time. hispanics care about the economy, and white women care about the economy, and everyone cares about the same thing. mark: at some point, you have to will he doc numbers, better with whites than romney did, or nonwhites? mary matalin: he will do better with nontraditional voters, nonwhites, then -- i don't want to care him -- compare him to romney necessarily. that is the current expectation. he is not going to lose texas by seven points.

she might lose maine, or one district in maine. who will she do far worse, if you want to do demographics, millennials, critical to him. and he will do better with some non-white voters. mark: who is trump's best pick as vice president? stuart stevens: i don't think who is vice president matters much in the electoral scene. john: so nobody. stuart stevens: if i was him, i would go with very strong foreign-policy credentials. that is his greatest weakness, which would be the case for anyone who is not held office -- has not held office before. john: please is say a name, don't do that thing he just did. mark: take your time, the show is an hour. [laughter] mary: ted cruz. mark: ted cruz. mary matalin: think about it. mark: we will think about it the whole commercial break. thank you both. stewart's the book is available now, called "the innocent have nothing to fear."

it is good. john: it is good. mark: go on amazon and buy it. gapng up, another living happening in great britain. ♪

>> european unity has been a poison shall us for decades with politicians. in its time, europe has been the graveyard of political reparations. john: that was michael elliott in a 1996 documentary, called the poisoned shallot, examining the impact of the british policies on the european union. us, michael with

elliott. we all woke up this morning and found boris johnson was no longer the front runner to be prime minister for reasons unknown and unknowable. why? most astonishing day of the week of astonishing days. this morning, we talked to boris johnson, he will not only declare as leader for the conservative party, but for all concerned to be the next prime minister, what happened is his partner in arms, michael gold, with whom he had a referendum to take britain and of the european union decided that boris was not quite up to the job, that he was. but he declared two hours later , and two hours later boris , through the towel in. absolutely unbelievable development that the british political village are still trying to absorb six or seven hours later. mark: so michael, handicap the

remaining people who have the inside track at this point? michael elliott: the leading candidate is secretary theresa may. she was actually campaigning to stay in the european union, she did not campaign very intensely, it must be said but she is a , remainer. she announced her candidacy for the leadership this morning. i thought she did very well this morning. she has a reputation for not being particularly charismatic or compelling, but i thought she was great this morning. she made a couple good jokes. she is already being called the angela merkel of british politics. she, i think, is the front runner. and then there are let me see, , lever -- leavers, and one three other remainer. stephen crabb. there are five candidates, but i think it will come down to theresa may or michael gold, that is how it looks right now. john: so michael we will have a

, new prime minister, a new leader of the tory party. what is the likelihood of two things the likelihood jeremy , first, corbyn will be the leader of the labour party, and what is the likelihood we will have a general election, a staff election called in the u.k. before the end of this year? michael elliott: really great questions. let's take the first one first. on jeremy corbyn, he has lost the control of three quarters of the members of the parliamentary labour party, of his mps, but he still has enormous support with the labour party leadership who cast the vote for, i'm sorry, labour party membership, vote for who the labour party leader is. right now, if he decided to wait out and stand for reelection as leader, i rather suspect he would win. that would split the party into two completely different arms. you would have a left wing, and then a softer parliamentary

party. i do not see how they could campaign together. it is something we have never seen before. will there be a general election? theresa went out of her way to may say there would not be, a new conservative government of which of course she hopes will be the prime minister, would see through the next four years to the next scheduled election. but i think what we have learned in the last eight days is that you really cannot predict what will happen in british politics more than 24 hours ahead, frankly. so whether negotiations get out develop you have iraq --irections -- corruptions to british politics. if there has to be a general election, i would not rule that out. but at the moment, no plans for that. john: michael elliott, a man touched by greatness, and had a it right when europe came to be a poisoned chalice. back to the election happening closer to hear. if you're watching us on

television, you can also watch us on the radio radio, bloomberg 99.1 fm. we will be right back. ♪

♪ mark: our next guest tonight is to guests tonight. joining us from the d.c. bureau, steve mcmahon, and from san diego, the former press secretary for george w. bush's strategist mindy tucker fletcher. the video you are seeing now is from a tour she gave to c-span of bush headquarters in austin, texas. here's a quick flashback from a simpler, more texas time. >> we are pretty high-tech here, we like to think. we have got our own television studio.

this is some of the brains of that operation, where they can feed video and audio from here. they monitor the room next door, which is a studio, which i will show you. there is this technical aspect where they keep track of our television and audio needs. mark: moderating twitter in that campaign. mindy tucker fletcher, thank you for joining us. i will ask you a version of the question i asked stuart stevens and mindy earlier -- mary earlier. what is something you wonder about hillary clinton? mindy: the thing i've been wondering about hillary clinton for a long time is who she has around her to help her articulate her voice. i think she is smart and intelligent, she seems to be funny at times. i don't know that she is found at the right staff person that enables her to be the best her. i think that has probably been holding her back for a long time. the question i want to ask someone with insight into her team. mark: steve, answer that, or

answer mine, what is something you wonder about her? steve mcmahon: she has people around her one of the best , strategists in the party. there are many others. what do i wonder about her? i wonder if she is frustrated when donald trump is speaking to people's emotions, and she is being, having to be the reasonable, rational, calm, deliberate leader that a president has to be. i mean donald trump is not , running as a president. he is running as a carnival show. and she is, i think trying to , project and demonstrate solid , steady leadership. sometimes people there is a , saying in our business they were quickly forget what you told them but longer remember how you made them feel. donald trump understand that and is making people feel something. i think that is frustrating on some level for the clinton campaign. john: let me ask you a question

out of the headlines today. bill clinton and loretta lynch, how big a mistake, or how big at all for bill clinton to seek that meeting, and how big a political mistake politically for loretta lynch to accept mr. clinton to come on her plane? steve: i think it was a mistake for both of them. i am kind of surprised at the judgment that was exercised in that case. i am sure nothing inappropriate happened, but i am also sure the way it looks to a lot of people who suspect these things, and the conspiracy theorists, is not good. there is just no getting around that. john: mindy, what you think about that? just to give a run of your judgment there. you know, itr: goes into the narrative. people are already distrustful of him, given his background. they tend to be distrustful of her, given what she has been shrouded with over the past few months. it was a really dumb move. even if nothing happened, everyone is going to think

something happened. it was just a really dumb move. on a campaign of this, running against the person they're running against at this level, they will have to be smarter than that. john: do you think it will matter a few months are now, or will it be forgotten? mindy fletcher: we don't know if one thing mattered that much, but if you play into a narrative over and over again, it starts to matter. they have to be careful, they cannot do things like this again. mark: you worry about national politics at a pretty high level, and now you have been out in california doing politics there. tell everybody what you think of donald trump being the nominee of the republican party. mindy fletcher: what is fascinating in california, the past few years, we have gone through a trump-like change. the party sort of has imploded. you look at the senate race, it should be competitive, we have no one really running that is competitive. it is a trump-like mentality, that sort of created that. it is interesting from this vantage point to watch it now happen at the national level. i think it is a fight for the

soul of our party. i think the people that go along to get along are being very dangerous and entering into something that they do not quite understand what they are getting into, the ramifications of which will be terrible. i think he is a terrible nominee, does not represent the best of our party. for me personally i find myself , at home not allowing my children to watch his speeches. -- give speeches. that is such a fundamental problem with our nominee, it speaks to things way bigger than party. just concerns that any normal mom sitting at home on her couch would have about this person who wants to be president. john: steve i know you wanted to , answer the question before about whether the bill clinton and loretta lynch thing would matter. but also answer this, in your view, could anything happen between now and the next few months in the e-mail-related controversy that would have a substantially significant impact on hillary clinton, negatively? steve mcmahon: for the first question, i don't think the

meeting ultimately will have any impact on the campaign. i think mindy is right, it does feed the narrative of the critics. that is unfortunate, but i am sure nothing inappropriate happened. it should not have happened in any event. as for the e-mail thing, i do not see anything developing. as you get closer to the convention and to the nomination, i think it becomes less and less likely anything will develop that will be meaningful and significant. look this investigation has been , going on for an awfully long time. there are many, many many fbi , agents involved, if you believe everything that has been leaked, and yet, they do not seem to have anything. they do not think it have anything, and if there is something my guess is, what i , know about the roles for proceeding in political cases on, if they had something, they almost certainly would've done something much sooner than now. mark: to go back to what you said about donald trump, would your preference be that no one in the republican party, no governor, endorsed him? mindy fletcher: that would be

great, because that would lead to what i hope is coming a , larger conversation within the harder -- party about what the heck do we do for the convention? what do we do for september? mark: that you plan to vote for? mindy: the conversation in california is that usually my vote doesn't count, and now people are relieved. it does not matter how i vote because hillary will win california. everybody is relieved about that, because nobody knows what to do. republicans do not know what to do. they are frustrated, they do not want hillary clinton, but they certainly do not want donald trump. it is a horrible place to be. mark: who are you going to vote for? mindy: i am hoping for a dustup at convention. mark: ok. mindy fletcher: i don't have to decide. i am hoping for a better choice. mark: mindy tucker fletcher, and steve mcmahon, thank you. great to talk to you. we will have more right after this. ♪

♪ john: remember that time when we were talking about before where mcmahon's mansion from a -- donald trump offered to save at mcmahon's mansion from a foreclosure? read about that on bloomberg.com. right now, and after you finish that, you can watch "bloomberg best where you can see bill gates, that is an important guy. he will see you tomorrow. until then, sayonara. after you see bill gates and the ad mcmahon story, we say sayonara. ♪

♪ rishaad: it is friday the first of july. i am rishaad salamat. this is "trending business". ♪ will be taking you to beijing, singapore, and tokyo. ata tumbling again, u.s. regulators issue an urgent warning. down, cars made between 2001-2003 have a far bigger risk of rupture. more pressure on