exclusive only on "andrea mitchell reports" right here on msnbc. and good day. i'm andrea mitchell in new york where i sat down with hillary clinton just a few moments ago to talk about the e-mail controversy and a range of issues trailing her campaign. welcome, secretary clinton. thank you so much for doing this interview. you said recently that using your personal e-mail while secretary of state was not the best choice and this you take responsibility. are you sorry? >> well, i certainly wish that i had made a different choice, and i know why the american people have questions about it. and i want to make sure that i answer those questions, starting with the fact that my personal e-mail use was fully above board. it was allowed by the state department as they have

confirmed. but, in retrospect, it certainly would have been better, i take responsibility, i should have had two accounts, one for personal and one for work-related. and i have been as transparent as i could, asking that all 55,000 pages be released to the public, turning over my server, looking for opportunities to testify before congress. i've offered for nearly a year finally the committee will give me a chance to testify in public toward the end of october. and i'm going to answer these questions and i'm also going to continue to talk about what's important to the people that i meet about this presidential campaign because it really is critical that we renew the basic bargain of america so that if you work hard, you do your part, you can get ahead and pay for college and have equal pay for equal work, and all the other important issues that are on people's minds. >> but this has created what even your own campaign manager

said are some headwinds. a lot of noise out there. let's get through some of it. first of all, are you sorry? do you want to apologize to the american people for the choice you made? >> well, it wasn't the best choice. and i certainly have said that. i will continue to say that as i've also said many times it was allowed and it was fully above board. the people in the government knew that i was using a personal account. but it would have been better if i had had two separate accounts to begin with. and certainly i'm doing all i can now to try to be as transparent about what i did have on my work-related e-mails and i think, you know, they will be coming out. i wish it were faster. it's a little frustrating that it's taking a while but there's a process that has to be followed. >> since 1995 the state department foreign affairs manual said that all e-mails, all records had to be preserved. in 2005 the manual's updated to say, quote, sensitive but

unclassified information should not be transmitted through personal e-mail accounts. eight months after you took office the u.s. code of federal regulations was updated to say, that agencies that allow employees to send and receive official electronic e-mail messages using a system not operated by the agency must ensure that federal records sent or received on such existing systems are preserved by the appropriate agency recording system. so there were a lot of advise is, no laws, correct, but a lot of advisories, including white house guidance, against using personal e-mail. and especially using personal e-mail exclusively. you say that just now you saids people in the government knew you used personal e-mail. >> right. >> the recent e-mails released indicating the help desk at the state department didn't know, they couldn't recognize what your e-mail address was. >> well, the people i was e-mailing to on the .gov system

certainly knew and they would respond to me on my personal e-mail. but i do think it was a fair question. it was allowed. i chose to do it as others who had been in high official positions had as well. . and i believed and it turned out to be very much confirmed that the vast majority of everything that i was sending to a .gov, the official government account, would be captured. and i have gone the extra step and gone through all of the e-mails that i had, from those four years in the state department, to make sure that anything, even being overly inclusive, that could possibly be work related was made available to the state department. >> a few quick points. there was an inspector general's report last march that said that in 2011 only 61,000 e-mails at the state department out of more than a billion were preserved because they archival system for five years was so bad and people

didn't know how to use it, people were not trained properly. so things weren't captured at the receiving end. >> well, that's not the case with my e-mails. i know that our government -- and this is an issue we must idaaddress -- is not up to spe. there's a huge amount of information, i can just speak about the state department certainly but the entire government, with the white house and every other agency, is struggling to try to keep up with the onslaught of e-mails. >> but does it concern you that people don't trust your answers on this? i mean, there was a quinnipiac -- i know this poll was everyone, republicans and democrats, but the first words that came to mind when asked about you were liar, untrustworthy, crooked. how does that make you feel? >> well, it certainly doesn't make me feel good. but i am very confident that by the time this campaign has run its course people will know that what i've been saying is

accurate and i will have a chance to do that in front of the entire world with the congressional committee hearing. they may disagree, as i now disagree with the choice that i made, but the facts that i have put forth have remained the same. but more importantly, the american people will know that they can trust me when it comes to standing up for them and fighting for them and, you know, being their advocate and their champion. and i think that's what this election, when it's all said and done, has to be about, who has the vision for america, who will be there every single day trying to renew the basic bargain that americans should expect from our country, who can get results, who has the tenacity and the skill to do that. and i'm very confident that the american people will believe that i do and will support me for president. >> couple of other quick points. why did you wipe the server clean even of you knew that a congressional committee or more committees were investigating

and why delete the 30,000 or so e-mails that were deemed personal? and how were -- how did you decide what to delete, what not to delete? >> let me tell you the process here. i'm glad you asked that, andrea, because i think it is one of the questions that people have. in the fall, i think it was october of last year, the state department sent a letter to previous secretaries of state asking for help with their record keeping. in part because of the technical problems that they knew they had to deal with. and they asked that that we, all of us, go through our e-mails to determine what was work related and to provide that for them. the letter came to my lawyers. i asked my lawyers to please do that. and it took weeks but they went through every single e-mail. >> the lawyers went through it. >> yes. every single e-mail. they were overly inclusive, if they thought anything was

connected, in fact, so inclusive the state department has already told us they're going to return 1200 e-mails because they were totally personal. at the end of that process, again, following the request of the state department, they had to printout all those e-mails that were work related. ended up being 55,000 pages. those were delivered to the state department. they kept a thumb drive that was delivered to or kept by my lawyers under lock and key. that left all the personal e-mails. and i was asked, do you need to keep your personal e-mails? i said, no, i don't. you can delete those. and they were. but that doesn't change what we were asked to do, how carefully we did it and how even the state department said, we sent them things that they don't believe they should have gotten. >> do you know what a lot of people are asking? why, why have just a personal system? you've said that it was because it was convenient. >> yes. >> clearly from the e-mails that were released it wasn't

convenient. there are a lot of, you know, confusing things, there were breakdowns, there were outages. why do that? were you trying to keep reporter or investigating committees away? >> no. >> what was the defensive mode? >> well, i had a personal e-mail when i was in the senate, as the vast majority of senators do. >> understood. >> it was very convenient. i did all my business on my personal e-mail. >> you remember a member of national security cabinet. >> that's why i'm so careful about classified information. and has been confirmed repeatedly by the inspectors general over and over, i did not send or receive any material marked classified. we dealt with classified material on a totally different system. i dealt with it in person. i dealt with it on secure phone lines. i had the traveling team, the technical team that went with me and they set up tents so that when i was traveling anything that was classified would be protected from frying eyes. i take classified material very,

very seriously. and we followed all the rules on classified material. now, what happens when you ask or when a freedom of information request asks that information be made public, all the agencies get to weigh in. and what you're hearing from other agencies is, it wasn't classified at the time but now we think it should be. and that is not uncommon. in fact, if i had had just a government account that was on the unclassified system, they would go through the same process. so again, it's confusing and that's why i'm trying to do a better job of explaining it to the american people. >> you have said that colin powell did the same thing. he actually had a personal e-mail and a state.gov official e-mail system. he didn't just rely on a personal system. i don't think there's any press debt for anyone just relying on a personal e-mail system at your level of government.

>> well, i can't speak for him. that certainly has been portrayed differently depending upon how it's considered. but this was fully above board. people knew i was using a personal e-mail. i did it for convenience. i sent e-mails that i thought were work related to people's .gov accounts. the fast what vmajority were ca by the system. and now we make sure that everything that could be considered work related is in the system of the state department. >> did anyone in your inner circle say, this isn't such a good idea, let's not do this? >> you know, i was not thinking a lot when i got in. there was so much work to be done. we had so many problems around the world. i didn't really stop and think, what kind of e-mail system will there be. >> does it raise judgment questions? >> well, i don't think so. i think the fact are pretty

clear that we had a lot of hard work, hard choices to make in those four years. and i'm very proud of the work we did. i'm very proud of all the people that i worked with. i think we really served our country well. and now the state department has everything that they could have. so at the end of the day i am sorry that this has been confusing to people and has raised a lot of questions. but there are answers to all of these questions and i will continue to provide those answers. and those answers have been confirmed and affirmed by the state department and by other government officials. and eventually i'll get to testify in public and i'm sure it will be a long and grueling time there. but all the questions will be answered. and i take responsibility and it wasn't the best choice. >> looking at the campaign now, you see huge crowds for bernie sanders and for donald trump and people talking about joe biden having an opening if he decides to make a difficult choice on an emotional level, which we understand. they talk about how authentic

these candidates are. does it -- does it hurt you when people say you're too lawyerly, you parse your words, you're not authentic, you're not connecting? >> well, that's just not my experience out campaigning. i feel very, very good about where we are. we've built a terrific organization, and the early states. and we're expanding into those states that we'll be after, iowa, new hampshire, south carolina, nevada. the level of support, the intensity of support that i'm experiencing as i speak with people. and talking about issues that i know are on their minds. i want to be the president who deals with all those big problems that are in the headlines, but also those problems that keep families up at night. and that's why i started out listening because i think you can come with your own ideas and you can, you know, wave your arms and give a speech. but at the end of the day are

you connecting with and really hearing what people are either saying to you or wishing that you would say to them? so on everything from mental health issues to substance abuse to college affordability to the continuing struggles that families face despite the fact that we've got a recovery and unemployment is down, people aren't feeling it. i am very excited and very energized by the campaign that i'm running. and you know, after labor day you kind of move more toward the laying out of your plans and moving toward debates and having the exchanges that you expect in a campaign. that's the next stage and i'm looking forward to that. >> are there real differences, big differences between you and joe bidens on domestic or foreign policy? >> you know, i'm not going to address any of the political questions around my friend joe biden. he has to make a really difficult decision.

you can see him struggling with it, and i just wish the best for him and his family. if he continues as vice president he will continue to serve with great a distinction. if he gets into this race, there will be plenty of time to get into the debate and the back and forth. but i think everybody should give him the space and respect he deserves to make what is a very difficult choice for him and his family. >> you're going to be giving a big speech on iran next week. at the same time, donald trump and ted cruz are going to be holding a rally on capitol hill against the iran deal. what do you say to your friends, many of them in the jewish community, who think this is a terrible deal? >> right. well, that's why i'm giving a speech next wednesday, because i was involved in the preliminary work. i helped to put to the the sanctions that pushed iran to the negotiating table. i was the person who explored the early efforts to see whether there could be a negotiation.

so i believe that the agreement is not perfect. it is by no means some kind of validation of iran. you know, my view is don't trust and verify. but it is a very important step, and it is better than the alternative. so on wednesday i will be outlining in great detail both why i support the agreement but equally importantly, what i would do as president to enforce it, to hold iran accountable, and to make clear that no options were off the table that they can never ever have a nuclear weapon. so this is not only about the agreement and what looks to be its approval by the congress. it's about what comes next. and i think that the american people are going to want a president who supports diplomacy even with those who are our adversaries to try to reach the kind of understandings that we

have but who will also get up every day and enforce that agreement strongly and vigilantly and i think that's a far better approach than some of the words you will hear on the same day that i deliver my speech from those who apparently don't believe in diplomacy, don't believe in the hard work of putting together international coalitions, don't believe in trying to get the best deal you can, and then don't believe that it needs to be enforced the way that i would enforce it. >> and donald trump, among other things that he's done, has really personally attacked one of your closest aides, huma abedin, what was your feeling about that? >> he's attacked so many people including my close aide and myself and many other people. you know, i can take that. i mean, that's just par for the course. i do regret that he is going after so many people. many of them by name.

from great basketball players to people who express different opinions from him. i think it's an unfortunate development in american politics that his campaign is all about who he's against, whether it's immigrants or women broadcasters or aides of other candidates. he is the candidate of, you know, being against. the vision that i have for america is how we come together, how we work together, how we set big goals again, whether it's combating climate change and getting moving on clean energy or whether it's making college affordable. i have specific plans about what i think would be good for the american people and good for us as a nation. i think we are a great country, and i think we are great because of our values, because of our history, because of the way we've overcome adversity, how we keep moving toward a more perfect union. that's what i'm running on. and so he can run his own

campaign. he can unfortunately do what he's doing, which i think is a bad development for our american political system. >> do you think he had a point in raising the question of whether it was appropriate for her to be taking a state department salary and also be paid by an outside company, closely associated with your husband, by you? >> well, you know, i was not directly involved in that, but everything that she did was approved under the rules as they existed by the state department. and so i, again, he can -- you know, he's great at innuendo and conspiracy theories and really defaming people. that's not what i want to do in my campaign. and that's not how i'm going to conduct myself. and i also believe the president of the united states does have to be careful about what he or she says. you know, i do know sometimes people say i'm careful about what i say. that's because for more than 20

years i've seen the importance of the president of the united states, the leader not only of our nation but of the world, having to send messages that will be received by all kinds of people. loose talk, threats, insults, they have consequences. so i'm going to conduct myself as i believe is appropriate for someone seeking the highest office in our country. >> as someone who has such a record in foreign affairs, what do you think, what do you feel when you see these thousands and thousands of migrant, men, women, and children, caught between two worlds, unable to get to germany and austria with open arms willing to receive them. >> right. >> should the united states raise its quotas and permit more people from syria to come in? >> well, the pictures, well, the stories we've been watching, this terrible assault on the syrian people now for years, are

just heartbreaking. and i think the entire world has to come together. it should not be just one or two countries or not just europe and the united states. we should do our part as should the europeans. but this is a broader, global crisis. we now have more refugees than we've had in many years, i think since the second world war. and as we've seen tragically, people are literally dying to escape the conflict in syria. i think that the larger middle east, i think asia, i think everybody should step up and say, we have to help these people. and i would hope that under the aegis of the unite nighted nations led by the security council and certainly by the united states which has been such a generous nation in the past, we would begin to try to find ways to help people get to safety in other lands, however, that does not solve the problem.

and the problem is one that the entire world now sees doesn't just affect the syrian people, it affects all of us. that's what i've been saying for years. that's why i advocated for a more robust response when assad began his onslaught on the syrian people. and i think we have got to come to grips with the fact that this is not going away and the millions of people who are fleeing need safe places to be but the conflict needs to be brought under control. >> was this a failure of the president's policy? >> well, it's the world's policies. it's not only the united states. i advocated for, as i say, a more robustsitting here i can't that that on its own would have made a difference because this has to be an international effort. we know the russians were standing in the way and i negotiated the agreement in june of 2012 in geneva which the russians signed off on and then

immediately began to reneg. so we know that this is not just a problem that the united states can solve. we have to do what i did, with the iranian sanctions. i had to get the russians onboard. i had to get the chinese onboard. it was not easy. but that's the kind of intensive diplomacy that is going to be required in order to stop the flow of refugees and to try to bring some peace and security back to the region. >> we've got the president of china coming later this month, in only a few weeks, for a state visit. and 20 years ago, 20 years ago tomorrow, you were leading the delegation and gave a speech that accused china of human rights abuses implicitly, you said that women's rights are human rights and human rights are women's rights. and i'm wondering whether you feel 20 years later that women have any more rights, have made progress in china and indeed around the world? >> you know, andrea, it feels like it was yesterday. you were there. you were there in beijing.

>> we were just kids. >> and i was very humbled and proud at the same time to represent the united states. and make that speech and to set forth a platform for action. 20 years later i would say this. women and girls have made progress in health and in education. in health we have done a lot to improve women's health, particularly lower maternal mortality. in education, we have closed the gap in primary education so that girls are attending at about the same rate as boys, but the gap then comes back in secondary education. so we have work to do. but if you look at economic rights and participation, political rights and participation, security and conflict, we have a lot to do. so it's a glass half filled kind of scenario. and as a senator, as secretary

of state, i argued strongly for putting women's rights at the center of foreign policy because when women have rights, you're more likely to have a middle class, you're more likely to have more stable family, we are more likely to have the opportunity for democracy to take hold and grow. so this for me was not only a moral issue, a humanitarian issue, a rights and equality issue, it was a security and strategic issue. and i'm going to continue to make that case. there has been progress in china. they have a long way to go, as so many other countries do. but even in advanced economies like our own, we don't have equal pay for equal work. the minimum wage is what two-thirds of the people on minimum wage are women. that's not a way to get yourself out of poverty. we still have our own challenges. and you know, clearly, my run for president is a way of sending a message that we have unfinished business in america

and we have an opportunity to lift up everyone, women, men, girls, and boys, at the same time. >> and i didn't know this at the time, but you kept that speech very secret. >> yes. >> because you knew that the state department and the white house national security advisers did not want you to deliver that strong a message. never before had a first lady taken the world stage and shaken things up. did you get a lot of blowback? d did your husband or others respond? >> no. before i went there was a lot of hand dld wriwringing and concer the congress as well as in the administration. >> i remember it well. >> but i made it clear that i was going to go. we had an excellent delegation. it was bipartisan in those days. both democrats and republicans. and madeleine albright, then our ambassador to the u.n., was the official head of the delegation. i was the honorary chair of it.

and i made it clear that this -- even though it was 20 years ago -- was a critical issue about america's values and our interests and our future security. so i made the case and i went and i was very pleased after the speech some of the naysayers contacted me and thanked me for doing it. >> i think back to 2008, you were in the coffee shop in new hampshire, and people really saw a different side of you. perhaps you felt that it might be slipping away after what happened in iowa. do you think back about that and do you worry about that this could be happening again, that what happened with your e-mail has created so much controversy that you could be losing this opportunity a second time? >> well, i don't feel that. i feel that i have questions to answered, which i intend to do at every turn with you and others about the whole e-mail

issue and to keep saying the same thing. and then also to keep making the case that i'm making for the presidency, which i stand for, what i've always stood for, what i will fight for. and how hardy will work to make sure that not just my granddaughter but every child, every grandchild in america has the same chance to live up to his or her god-given potential. and i know that we're living at a time when there's a lot of skepticism about politic, even cynicism. people are angry, they're frustrated. they feel somehow that their lives are slipping away, you know. and they want something answers. sometimes those answers are, you know, bombastic and very ideological, but i can understand why people are looking for some way out of what they view as their own problems, particularly their economic problems. i mean, we're beginning to see

the fruits of the recovery but paychecks aren't growing. people are not feeling that they are rising with rising corporate pay and rising corporate profits. that's just wrong. and i have said that for many years. and even in my campaign last time, i was very clear against some of the worst abuses that i thought were unfortunately bad for our economy and not fair to the american people. i'm talking about the same things, i will continue to talk about the same things. and i really trust the american people. i trust them to assess who will really get up and fight for them. not just give a speech for them, not just sort of appeal to their emotions, but will work to put a coalition together, whether it was on iran or whether it was in the congress when i served in the senate, and i worked across the aisle, who will work every single day to make their lives better. and i think when they look at all the candidates, they will believe that that's exactly what

i will do. that is my commitment. >> thank you so much, hillary clinton. >> thank you. let's bring in our panel to breakdown what we just heard from hillary clinton. joining me now, "the washington post" anne gearan and robert costa, former republican chairman michael steele, democratic strategist bob slum, amy at the cook political report, alex seitz-wald, my colleague covering the hillary clinton, and rachel maddow, host of "the rachel maddow show" right here on msnbc. rachel, first to you. your take aways, this is the longest that hillary clinton has spoken on this issue. >> well, and it's also the longest we've heard her in a one-on-one, back and forth, follow up questions and everything almost through the entire campaign. i think this is only like maybe the third time she's done a sit-down interview since the 2016 cycle started. so it's great to see her drawn out on these issues. i think you went more than ten minutes with her straight on the e-mails issue.

obviously it's starting to feel like a threshold political issue for her, not just a side bar. and in terms of, you know, making news on that subject, she said i'm sorry that this has been confusing and has raised a lot of questions. she said i take responsibility. it wasn't the best choice. but when you pressed her on why she did it and why she got herself into this mess, this awkward situation, you pointed out it did not seem to be convenient, which is how she explained it before, ultimately what it fwoboiled down, i was n thinking a lot, i did not stop and think. basically, i didn't get this was a big deal. i think that that will -- maybe that is what it boils down to and she's going to have to take lump on this subject if there is a legal consequence, just a political problem. but i've never heard it boiled down that far for her before. i think that's going to be -- that's going to be the biggest takeaway on that issue. she made news on a lot of subjects with you. >> she said, you know, that she's sorry -- when i asked her

whether she's too lawyerly or parses words, didn't send or receive anything that was marked classified, which is a very lawyerly con instruct, she said she knows the importance of being measured. she's contrasting herself with donald trump and others. >> and then she went back to that point again. you put it to her in difficult terms, basically. does it hurt you that people see you as inauthentic compared with these people -- with bernie sasan sanders and joe biden and donald trump, people getting so much interest in politics because of their perceived authenticity. you asked her about that. then she went back to it again on speaking carefully, speaking as you described as a laurie manner. she said what i learned over the past 20 years is a president of the united states has to be careful about what he or she says. loose talk, insults, and threats have consequences. she defending basically, listen, i talk like a president, i talk like somebody at the highest levels of government because i have operated at the highest

levels of government. the reason i don't rail and insult people and move people in an emotional way is because i'm speaking precisely and that should be seen as feature, not a bug. >> either way she seems to be trying to reset the an acknowle from conference calls that we've had they realize the defensiveness starting with that u.n. national -- the security council press conference from march, bad venue, bad approach. >> in front of the giant war mural and she's doing war with the press. >> and the fact that it's been along the road infrequently but in iowa, new hampshire, occasional comment to the press about the server. but without really explaining it. i think she knows she's got to prepare going into this october 22nd testimony to the benghazi committee that she's got to show that she's prepared to be more

transparent. >> yes. i think there are two different things that are going on at once. i've had -- with all my conversations with people involved in or in a position to know about what's going on in the clinton campaign, seems clear to me they have a clear calendar in their own mind about when things start, pivot points, and what is supposed to be happening at what tomb in the year in the campaign. you heard her reference labor day. they clearly think there's a new part of the campaign that heads toward the debates. that starts after labor day. in addition to this interview with you today she's also going to be on "the ellen degeneres" show next week. so clearly they say something new is going on. i don't think we should conflate that with them thinking the e-mail thing is over. they clearly know the e-mail thing isn't over. they know she's going to have that testimony. she referenced that forth coming testimony over and over again. i think they now are planning to be working on the e-mail issue as a political matter, defensively or otherwise. probably for the duration. and i think if you want hillary clinton to be president, that

should probably be seen as a good sign. because all of those earlier missteps were her trying to say, got it, it's done, i hear you. let's move on. nobody else was ready to move on. it seems like now they're realizing or at least she's realizing in this interview talking to you this is something she's got to talk about. >> in fact, they were trying to say it's only you reporters asking about it. in all of my travels and as recently as 5:00 this morning when someone brought me some coffee in the hotel, and the first thing out of this gentleman's mouth was, do you think joe biden is going to run and hillary clinton has so much baggage? >> yeah. >> i didn't anyboinitiate that conversation. that's what people are asking at coffee shops and hairdressers an people who are her friends and supporters. >> yes. you know, it's interesting. it's kind of a snake that eats its own tail to a certain extent. part of it is, people are talking about this so much, it's getting so much attention, so many questions, going on for so long. she's not able to put it to rest. given that there's so much

discussion, does that means she's not handling the issue, does it become an electability issue? it's just an observation of how much kinetic activity there is on this question. on the substantive question whether or not it is a problem for her, whether she did something so wrong or so uniquely different than any other high-ranking government official there are going to be more things discovered or a more serious breach, sort of a different question. an i think the more the questions are in that former category they're just about like, can she handle it, can she make it go away, the better off she is. when people start worrying about the content of the controversy rather than just its existence, that's when, you know, i think we won't get there until late october, until after that testimony. >> rachel maddow, of course. see you tonight. thank you so much for coming? >> congratulations on this, andrea. you moved the ball forward a really long way here. thanks. >> thank you for being here. and now to our panel. anne gearan, michael steele, bob

shrum, alex seitz-wald. first to bob shrum in california, you've seen a lot of campaign, candidates. what is your response to what you heard today? >> well, i thought you did a great job and it was a great interview. the e-mails are a self-inflicted wound that represent a monthly blood letting politically with every release of a traunch of those e-mails. she is too lawyerly. she's still too lawyerly. the fact that the first words out of her mouth are not, i'm really sorry about this, and instead we're still hearing about convenience, which is not convincing as you demonstrated. it's just a mistake. when you asked her about a authentici authenticity, i mean, you know, she could -- nk is fine. we have all the organization in place and we're doing this in iowa and that, why can't you just say, smile and say, well, look, maybe i can do better and i will. i teach now at the university of southern california and my students wanted to have a discussion, 40 of them the other

day, about the race. and i asked how many were democrats. i was surprised. most of them were. i asked how many were for hillary clinton. probably about 20 or 22. then i said, how many of you are enthusiastic? three. there's an enthusiasm gap out there and she has to learn how to connect with people. she did it in 2008. attend of that campaign. and she did it in that interview as -- that you showed in the coffee shop in manchester. but if she doesn't do that she's going to end up where one of the -- i said to the students, why, why do you feel this way? one of them said, she's old and cold. now, i think the age comment is very unfair. but i think right now she's got to transcend this sense of coldness and connect with people. >> and to you, anne gearan, you've traveled all over the country with hillary clinton and all over the world when you covered the state department, as have i. she does connect with people one-on-one, very well.

>> absolutely. that's been a disconnect that's really been true throughout her public career. she comes across very differently with small settings. one-on-one settings in a small room. she connects in places like a coffee shop in new hampshire in ways that she doesn't always certainly when she's before the press. i thought one of the most interesting parts of our interview was when you played that clip from new hampshire in 2008 and asked her whether she feels like yet again something that had seemed like it was hers and maybe to her feels rightfully so, could be slipping through her hands. and she didn't flinch. she said no. but i really wonder, that was a very poignant moment. >> michael steele, she does in many ways contrast favorably, does she not, on the presidential level when she talks about foreign policy for

people out on the campaign with your party? >> no, she does. she does bring a high degree of gravitas and i thought probably for, in my hearing, the best part of this interview was when she was in her element on foreign policy, when she was talking about syria, when she was talking about the impact of, you know, foreign policy on people's lives as we see the crisis emerging with refugees. so she can really bring that element of states manship and authenticity, if you will, at that level. but i think bob really puts his finger on the concerning and continuing problem that she has, and that's going to be hard for her to overcome. i think one of the most interesting moments for me was when you asked her about, okay, so didn't anyone around you tell you that this e-mail server issue would be a problem? and her answer wasn't about the people around her. her answer was, well, i was too busy and i was doing all this other stuff. people sit there and go, well,

clearly you either don't listen to your people or you have a bunch of around you that don't have the power to tell you, hillary, this is stupid, don't do it. that's what resonates with those young students that bob has in his classrooms more than anything else. >> i just -- amy walter from the cook political report, i also want to bring in, we did just for fun for social media what lester holt asked of jeb bush. a quick lightning round. and here's how it went. we're going the get to that. okay. >> -- or night owl? >> unfortunately both. i'd like to be one or the other. >> workout of choice? >> swimming, but that's not always available, so treadmill and weights and walking. >> and the food you crave most? >> probably chocolate. >> i'm with you on that. what are you binge watching?

>> right you we were so late in watching "house of cards" we're nearly done with the season. >> text or e-mail? i'm not sure that's appropriate but we asked jeb bush and we're asking you. >> e-mail. >> and one thing you cannot live without. >> sleep. don't get enough of it, always want more of it. >> we can all relate to that. amy walter from political report, she's -- it's fascinating to watch the sort of what hillary clinton can do in trying to explain these things and pivoting to the issues she wants to talk about. and the truth is a lot of the things she wants to talk about out on the campaign trillion have not becovered as much becae they've stepped on their own message, on days when she's rolling out the cuba policy, the e-mails are being released a they release their tax returns. you know, it's been a very awkward couple of months. >> there's no doubt this has

been a very rough summer. but the one inference i thought -- i saw today from her previous interactions with the present dealing with the issue she does not seem exasperated by her questions. she was probably internally not happy with a lot of questions that you asked but it didn't come across in that peevish way, in a i wish i didn't have to be talking about this way. there is certainly a sense as well, look, i think at the end of the day if you are a voter who has maybe been paying attention, maybe not, but know about the issue of the e-mails, i don't think this interview is going to change your mind about how you feel about her, whether you think she's honest or trustworthy. this suggests that this is a campaign that knows this is going to be a grinded out kind of campaign. it's not going to be, as she says, she's not going to be the person who is going to give those great speeches and get people up on their feet. she's going to be a little more cautious. maybe she's going to be a little more hesitant in the way that

she dautalks about some issues. fundamentally she knows she is very good at, as i said, grinding it out, at making it through this process, handling the process. she's not going to get enough sleep, she knows that, and she knows what to do when she doesn't. >> anne, we're going to take a quick break. more reaction from the exclusive interview with hillary clinton and a few other big political notes today. joe biden, donald trump. you're watching "andrea mitchell reports" only on msnbc.

♪ mother nature can turn in an instant; don't turn back. introducing the new 2016 ford explorer. be unstoppable. ♪ this is my fight song... nbut your dell 2-in-1 laptoped gives you the spunk for an unsanctioned selfie. that's that new gear feeling. all laptops on sale, save $230 on this dell 2-in-1. office depot officemax. gear up for school. gear up for great. the only difference: that little blue thingy. you see it? that's a sensor. using ge software, the light can react to its environment- getting brighter only when it's needed. in a night, it saves a little energy. but, in a year it saves a lot. and the other street? it's been burning energy all night.

for frank. frank's a cat. now, two things that are exactly the same, have never been more different. ge software. get connected. get insights. get optimized. ♪ [ female announcer ] everything kids touch at school sticks with them. make sure the germs they bring home don't stick around. use clorox disinfecting products. you handle life; clorox handles the germs. you handle life;

the drought is affecting at pg&e we've definitely put a focus on helping our agricultural customers through the drought. when they do an energy efficiency project and save that money they feel it right in their pocket book. it's exciting to help a customer with an energy efficiency project because not only are they saving energy but they are saving water. we have a lot of projects at pg&e that can help them with that and that's extremely important while we're in a drought. it's a win for the customer and it's a win for california. together, we're building a better california. i'm not going to address any of the political questions around my friend joe biden. he has to make a really difficult decision. you can see him struggling with it and i just wish the best for him and his family. if he continues as vice president he can continue to serve with great distinction. if he gets into this race, there

will be plenty of time to get into the debate and the back and forth. i think everybody should give him the space and respect he deserves to make what is a very difficult choice for him and his family. >> our panel is still with me. alex seitz-wald, joe biden, this is the great unknown in this race right now with hillary clinton and the democratic side. i want to play a little bit for all of us of joe biden last night in atlanta at a synagogue giving a memorial lecture for stu, a lifetime wife's friend, speaking emotionally about a decision he faces. >> the most relevant factor in my decision is whether my family and i have the emotional energy to run. some might think that is not appropriate. but unless i can go to my party

and the american people and say that i'm able to devote my whole heart and my whole soul to this endeav endeavor, it would not be appropriate. the factor is, can i do it, can my family undertake what is an arduous commitment that we would be proud to take under ordinary circumstances. the honest to god answer is, i just don't know. i know from previous experience, after my wife and daughter, and you know, stu, there is no way to put a timetable on that. if i can reach that conclusion that we can do it in a fashion that would still make it viable, i would not hesitate to do it.

>> that's a man who has not yet decided. it leaves the clinton campaign really with no way to plan the way forward. >> right. this is what's so difficult for them. there's so much that's outside of their control. i think they start to think that they can see the light at the end of the tunnel. it's a very long tunnel until the e-mails all of the way come out in january. then you have this big question of joe biden looming over them as robbie said yesterday, the clinton campaign's manager on a conference call with us. he would be a commanding presence in the race. this is not bernie sanders or martin o'malley, the sitting vice president of the united states. he's run twice before. what a contrast with clinton. they have a lot of the same policy position, similar establishment ethos. but he is all pethos. she is careful. he is so off the cuff, wears his heart on his sleeve. fascinating race but i don't think it's a contrast they particularly want to play out. >> robert costa, donald trump,

you've interviewed him so often. hugh hewett, the radio host, interviewed him last night and asked him a lot of foreign policy questions. >> are you familiar with general soamani. >> yes. go ahead, tell me. >> he runs the qods forces. >> okay, right. >> do you expect -- >> the qods, by the way, have been horribly mistreated by us. >> not the kurds. the qods forces, the iranian revolution, the bad guys. >> right. >> do you expect his behavior -- >> i thought you said kurds, kurds. >> no, qods. i'm looking at the next commander in chief to know who he is and al zawahiri, do you know the players without a scorecard yet, donald trump? >> no, i tell you honestly, i think by the time we get to office they will all be changed. >> i don't believe in gotcha questions. i'm not trying to quiz you on who the worst guy in the world is. >> when you're asking me about

who, you know, who is running this, this, this. that's not -- that is not -- i will be so good at the military your head will spin. >> robert costa, take it from there. this is a man running for president of the united states. a conservative talk show host, hugh hewitt. unfair? trump said today on "morning joe" that they were gotcha questions. >> listening to clinton, she is respectful toward vice president biden and bernie sanders. her eye is on the election and went at tramp. she believes in conspiracy theories. presenting herself as someone who is steady, ready to be president, already making that contrast with trump. this has created a ripple on the right. some conservatives now are happy trump took the pledge with the gop. but when it comes to that readiness question, his dealings with word leaders, had it in the business world but not in every sphere, that's a lingering question. it's going to be an important one before this next debate.

>> let me quickly go around the horn. when we talk about this campaign going forward, amy walter, this hillary clinton ask the hillary clinton that is going to do more interviews, is going to be more responsive, less defensive perhaps until the next moment. certainly october 22nd when she has a meeting with the benghazi committee is not going to be a happy moment. >> no, that won't be particular lu fun but she seems well girded for it. this campaign in general is going to head to a new stage. we've had a lot of polling and a lot of conversations about donald trump and what he means, what everything else means. no money has been spent on this campaign yet. with i've had one debate in this campaign. i think we're about to hit a new level. we're going to see hundreds of millions of dollars to get spent in these early states. the polling is going to start to move. the debates are going to start to matter more. now we're really getting to the hart of the campaign. it's been a fun summer but now the works begins. >> bob shrum, you know better than anyone that things can

change dramatically, very quickly in politics in national campaigns. >> sure. at this point in 2004 howard dean was way ahead. john kerry was written off. obviously that changed profoundly. i think the real question here is, number one, does joe biden enter the race because you have a whole new race post biden. alex characterized the difference that would be there and why the clinton campaign probably doesn't want that race. so that's the first thing. and the second thing is, that hillary clinton is going to have to deal over time with this need to inspire people. i really believe that. and i actually think what we need to see back here democrats who are for hillary clinton need to see back here is the hillary clinton of pennsylvania and ohio in 2008, when she could really animate people on the stump. >> and michael steele, who is going to inspire republicans? >> well, that's a good question. i think a lot of folks are struggling with that question as well, andrea. right now donald trump is the

guy. he's sucking the air out of the room. he's moving the conversation in his direction. this upcoming debate at the reagan library is going to be, i think, very important for a breakout moment either for a jeb bush or a scott walker who is fated into the either. certainly john kay ssich, not j take on donald trump but to move the campaign into that stage that says i'm ready to be president. >> and, anne gearan, i think we're going to see a different hillary clinton in the questions and answers and her comments on the campaign trail. >> yeah. clearly this interview is part of her attempt to pivot toward a increased tempo in the fall and taking on a lot of new subjects, doing so in different venue, going beyond the four early states, although she will be heavily concentrated there.

both her campaign yesterday and she have promised to take more questions along the way. they know they have to engage more and that she has to be seen as ready and willing to answer all of the questions around the e-mail issue that they tried to kind of dismiss. >> thanks so all of you. and this does it for this edition of "andrea mitchell reports." more of my exclusive interview with hillary clinton tonight on "nbc nightly news" with lester holt. follow the show online, on facebook and twitte twitter @mitchellreports. ♪ one, two, three o'clock. four o'clock pop. ♪

five, six, seven o'clock. eight o'clock pop. ♪ ♪ nine, ten, eleven o'clock ♪ ♪ twelve o'clock pop ♪ we're gonna pop around the clock tonight. ♪ ♪ put your glad rags on and join me hon' ♪ ♪ we'll have some fun when the clock strikes one. ♪

♪ we're gonna pop ♪ ...around the clock tonight. we're gonna pop, pop, pop ♪ ... 'till the broad daylight. ♪ ♪ we're gonna pop around the clock tonight. ♪ pop in new tide pods plus febreze a 4 in 1 detergent that cleans, brightens and fights stains. now with 24-hour freshness. no student's ever been the king of the campus on day one. but you're armed with a roomy new jansport backpack, a powerful new dell 2-in-1 laptop, and durable new stellar notebooks, so you're walking the halls with varsity level swagger. that's what we call that new gear feeling. you left this on the bus... get it at the place with the experts to get you the right gear. office depot officemax. gear up for school. gear up for great.

you can't always see them. but it's our job to find them. the answers. the solutions. the innovations. all waiting to help us build something better. something more amazing. a safer, cleaner, brighter future. at boeing, that's what building something better is all about. ♪ i'm thomas roberts. we start are hour with new dwmmentes. awaiting updates out of fox lake, illinois, at 1:30 p.m. eastern. authorities will brief the media on the investigation into the shooting death of police hue tenant joe gliniewicz. we'll have the latest on the search in the suspects in this hour. to andrea mitchell's

exclusive interview with hillary clinton. 24 this morning she sat down with the democratic front-runner for a wide ranging 30-minute discussion. front and center of that talk on going controversy over clinton's c e-mail server. an aide is testifying before the house benghazi select committee. the server is expected to be one of the topics of that conversation. and it was when a former aide testified before the committee yesterday. here's what secretary clinton told andrea mitchell about that now controversial decision over her private server. >> are you sorry? do you want to apologize to the american people for the choice you made? >> well, it wasn't the best choice. and i certainly have said that. i will continue to say that as i've also said many times it was allowed and it was fully above board. the people in the government knew that i was using a personal account. but it would have been better if i had had two separate accounts to b