is something they're famous for. when it comes to propaganda. in the height of the cold war, they came up with the idea of a nuclear winter, that was meant to totally dissuade -- there are so many numerous, you know, historical events where the soviets and the russians have tried to sway public opinion to their side. certainly with the internet and facebook and social media, it's a great boon for them. so you're absolutely right. you don't have to look beyond wikileaks to see russian, you know, involvement and collusion to try to change the outcome of this. unfortunately, i don't think it actually, you know, went on to physically change any vote counts. i think you're just not going to find evidence of that. >> i want to broaden out this panel now, for a moment, pause and let you know that we are now into the 6:00 p.m. hour of this special edition, which we call "p.m. joy." we'll stay on this topic about a possible swing state recount and russia's role in the election. i want to bring back national republican consultant, katon d dawson, and add you to the mix. with democrats off down the road, talking about machines

being hacked and having jill stein raise a lot of money, basically leading them down this pass, is it they're getting off the topic that you and i talk about on air a lot, which is the grassroots politics of winning back these state legislatures, these state governor's mansions, so they can actually have some say in the way these elections are run. what do you think? >> in 24 months, we have another election coming. one thing's going to happen. jill stein and this circus she's doing is one thing about money. it's about 40% of us going to the online companies that's raising the money. it's going to get watered down. she's trying to be important and relevant. and to be frank with you, she's using hillary clinton's donors and the think towards miss clinton, secretary clinton out there in an unproductive way. if they were raising 5 million to go do some get out the vote and redistricting, good for you. that's a real smart thing for the party to do. that's a good thing to do while the dnc is disorganized and states are licking their wounds. you've already heard a professional today and everybody

else tell you that it's not going to work. the election wasn't rigged up in those states. i do get 107,000 votes, that means every vote matters. but joy, like i said, follow the money and follow the distractions, it's not good for the democratic party, it's good for the republican party. >> and molly, meanwhile, democrats could be raising money for an outstanding senate race in louisiana, that could actually help them in terms of their majority/minority status in the senate. do you see evidence that democrats are as fixated on that se race as they are on jill stein's sort of adventures in trying to get a recount? >> well, it doesn't seem to be the case. and according to some articles that i've read, and again, given what russia's been doing, these could be fake news articles, but i don't think so. but, you know, jill stein can't even guarantee that all the money she's raising is going to actually go towards a recount. in fact, she makes the disclaimer, we cannot guarantee a recount will happen. if we raise more money than what's needed, the surplus will

go towards election integrity efforts and promoting the voting system integrity. so you would think that the democrats would be focusing more of their efforts on going into louisiana and trying to win that -- the democratic spot for that seat in, you know, the democratic candidate, to send him to washington, d.c. but they aren't. and it's just sort of systemic of what's going on within the democratic party. and it's happened before with republicans, when they've felt out of control after 2008. you know, the question is, where do you go? you look at capitol hill, and see a young up and comer, tim ryan, challenging nancy pelosi for the leader position, in the house democratic caucus. referee it just seems like there isn't a lot of focus on what really needs to be done in order to bolster their majority in the senate. >> and we're going to talk about that tomorrow, the ryan/pelosi thing. what is jill stein's end game. you did a pretty extensive piece

on some of her ironic holdings, financially -- >> the defense contractors, et cetera. >> what do you think her end game is here? >> if green party in 2020 can get to 5% of the vote, it changes everything for them. then they get on balance, automatically. they get more fec money, the matching money for a presidential race. it's the best thing for them. when she talks about election integrity, i think that's what she's referring to, is allowing the party to build the apparatus they need to get to a higher vote in 2020 in their presidential race. jill stein is about jill stein. and what she's doing that's terrible is, is that she's t tapping into the heartbreak of hillary clinton supporters, who cannot make sense of the election results, especially since they were so close. i don't think she would be doing this if this were a ten-point race. >> and eric, you've got this situation where jill stein, who is a regular contributor to r.t., "russia today," which is implicated in the disinformation campaign that infected this election. you had russian propaganda more

retweeted, more viewed than actual news. it just swamped, you know, i think it was a description in "the washington post," that it was like spitting into a tsunami, trying to counter all of the propaganda that was coming, including from "r.t.," where she is a contributor, where she essentially opposed the eu's attempts to go anti-propaganda -- an anti-propaganda resolution, to stop russia from doing this in europe. jill stein went on their air, back in november, back last year, and opposed that. so this is somebody who is on the side of russian propaganda. this is also, could be, it's media bait, right? what do you make of it? >> the layers of irony and hypocrisy, whatever you want to call it, are numerous. look, she's tapping into this frustration. you know, hillary clinton supporters, they looked the at those wisconsin polls. hillary clinton led in virtually every poll every taken in wisconsin, michigan, pennsylvania. she led in 110 of the last 114

polls. so people are looking around and they still don't have a good explanation why this happened. is there a disconnect between what people tell pollsters and what happens when they g in the booth when there's a woman at the top of the ballot. i think that's a much more interesting topic for investigation. and voter suppression is what cost the vote. they should be -- you know, democrats should be spending way more time, you know, battling these laws and trying to look at how do we battle, if we have states and governments in place that are committed to not letting people vote, you know, john kerry, there was a recount in ohio in 2004. he picked up 300 votes. >> that's right. >> this isn't going to -- >> and what eric was just talking about, these tweets, he talked about the difference, naveed, between the exit polls and the reported vote count. and it is intriguing, right. in north carolina, the exit polls show hillary clinton would get a 2% winning margin. the reported vote count was 3.8%

for trump. pennsylvania, the exit polls show hillary clinton up in the exit polls by 4.4%, but trump wins by 1.1. wisconsin, hillary up 3.9% in the exit polls, trump wins by 0.9. florida, hillary up, trump wins. when you're talking to people who are experts, even frank luntz was tweeting, hillary clinton's got this in the bag, i've seen the exit polls. the discrepancy between the exit polls and the vote count does raise alarms. do you see a feed to kind of audit the vote definement, or do you think there's some explanation that are. >> i'm sure the explanation is exactly what your other panelists are saying. it's much more of a practical one, but vote suppression, whether it's sheer incompetence. we often joke in the military, it's yesterday's technology tomorrow, and this is the same thing with the local and federal government. it's just not efficient. and when you're talking about a precinct counting by hand and then doing some algorithm to pass it on to,, you know -- could there be honest mistakes? absolutely. i think if there are mistakes

and whatever the margin of error is going to be, it's probably less to do with anything from the russians and more to do with whether it's voter suppression or just sheer, you know, just not the most efficient process. and i think, again, just, you're talking about jill stein. i want to close with this, is the russians, it's not so much that they are for trump. it's they are for putting united states in chaos. with wikileaks, they supported trump and now that trump is president, they're going to go after him. simply the united states being in chaos is a benefit to russia. and that's kind of what you're seeing with jill stein. >> and you literally had "the washington post" say that one of the goals of this disinformation campaign was to raise questions about the integrity of american democracy. jill stein's statement about what she's doing is that people need to question the integrity of american -- like, she literally just repeated almost those exact words. >> let's not forget, she had julian assange at the green party convention as the keynote speaker. julian assanassange.

she was attacking people that said wikileaks and russia are in collusion over john podesta's e-mail. and she said, that's red baiting, this is offensive and uncalled for. and now all of a sudden, she's talking about the election integrity. let's not also forget that she announced her intention to file this recount on "r.t.." >> and i want to put up this picture. the monitor mideast reporter laura rosen had this photo, i'll give her credit, this is jill stein and general flynn at the same table at which they were paid to attend a gala, celebrating "r.t.," which is funded by the kremlin, and in which they were there feting vladimir putin. is it a failure of the media that we have not fully explained who these people are. >> it is. "the washington post" hads this very good front page story today. everyone's talking about this massive propaganda of the russian government, combined with fake news, during the campaign, you know, the news couldn't get these stole

e-mails fast enough. it was hour after hour, page after page. kind of this gleeful weird, you know, voyeurism. you know, what did she say? what did podesta say. and almost this chortling about, oh, they're stolen by a federal government. we'll deal with that later. we're finding out it was a massive campaign and it did not get the attention it deserved at the time and i don't know if it's going to get the attention now. >> and molly, isn't it true, and democrats may -- it may be a more painful explanation of what happened. but there's this combination of voter suppression. look at that happen that shows all those states with now voting restrictions, where people may have gone with the intention of voting and not been able to vote. where people wouldn't in wisconsin, maybe 300,000 people didn't get the i.d.s that they needed. you had ari berman streaming from the top of the hilltop that this was happening, not much was done by democrats. and meanwhile, you had the media fixated, obsessed with every utterance out of wikileaks. every e-mail got live coverage

hours and hours and hours, front page stories, over and over and over about e-mails, when the comey letter came out, it was splashed all over the front page of american newspapers. really, what took hillary clinton down was information, disinformation, and voting restrictions. i think that seems to be the okam's razor explanation. what do you think? >> i think the democrats didn't do a good job countering this when they knew it was coming. hillary clinton and the e-mails, going back to her secrecy, that's the one thing that a lot of democrats on capitol hill would talk to me privately about, is that they didn't like the secrecy of hillary clinton. and the problem with that is, when you wall yourself off, you're open to, you know, this expose, whereas, you know, with the wikileaks and what not -- >> not when you're donald trump, you're not. donald trump is the most secretive. he didn't release his tax returns, he didn't hold press conferences. i think that that rule you're talking about doesn't apply to anybody but hillary clinton, that i've been able to see. >> but donald trump did hold a lot of press conferences, but

whether his campaign was elected or not, in the beginning, he was holding press conferences all the time. and he would tweet things out and own things, and hillary clinton, you know, that was the one thing that, again, these are democrats on capitol hill saying to me, privately, you know, we wish she would just confront this e-mail issue a little bit more. because if she doesn't do that, then that opens her up to attacks and the exposes from wikileaks, because she wasn't forthcoming with a lot of the things that were in there. and i'm just saying that was a frustration they had. and they would have liked the democratic party to be a little bit more proactive about that. and couple that with the bernie sanders, what was going on behind the scenes within the democratic national committee, and, you know, pushing for hillary clinton and bad mouthing bernie sanders, and that really turned a lot of people, a lot of bernie sanders supporters off on hillary clinton. so, you have this whole problem that was created when, perhaps, it could have been staved off, if she had just kind of released everything and, you know,

notified us about her private server and all that jazz. >> i find that very, very hard to believe, that there's anything hillary clinton could have done to change the narrative. but eric, you are the expert here. i'll leave it to you. >> in terms of transparency, the clinton foundation didn't have to release any information. they said, let's be transparent and put it all online. what happened? it was all weaponized against them. who were these donations from? why didn't you return it, things like that? 30 years of tax returns. there's no way you can seize your stolen e-mails coming and try to avoid that. >> or the fbi writing a letter -- i'll give katon the last word on this segment. could republicans have asked for a better movable feast than a media that is super skeptical of your opponents, no matter what she does, it's going to rouse suspicions. wikileaks, the russians, and laws in many of these states that make it harder for your opponent supporters to vote. >> a media that was so thirsty for a story that it became

irresponsible. whether it was wikileaks, whether it was e-mail, whether it was the -- and it came to benefit donald trump, because he became inoculated to media criticism, to the voters that were taking a look at him. so i found it to be irresponsible in benefiting, certainly, president-elect donald trump, more so than hillary clinton and if you had to re-run it all, it just shows you how modern media has changed. >> absolutely. absolutely. all right, well, eric bowler, katon dawson are sticking around. happy friday. up next, house speaker paul ryan is not wasting any time in going for his great are dream, to privatize medicare. what will this mean for seniors across the country? stay with us.

♪ i want a hippopotamus for christmas ♪

♪ only a hippopotamus will do at the united states postal service, we deliver more online purchases to homes than anyone else in the country. and more hippopotamuses, too. i am totally blind. i lost my sight in afghanistan. if you're totally blind, you may also be struggling with non-24. calling 844-844-2424. or visit my24info.com.

what people don't realize, because of obamacare, medicare is going broke, medicare is girlfriend to have price controls. because of obamacare, medicare

is in fiscal straight strats. you have to deal with those issues if you're going to repeal and replace obamacare. >> house speaker paul ryan has his facts wrong. obamacare has repaired medicare solvency by more than a decade. the chair of the budget committee has now confirmed that house republicans are planning major changes to medicare within the next year. if they follow ryan's proposal, that means inviting private insurers to compete with traditional medicare in a marketplace, and having the federal government subsidize senior's premiums. joining me now, raul reyes and jonathan cohn, senior national correspondent at "the huffington post." back with me are will juwando. explain to us what this voucherized medicare plan would look like, that ryan has been wanti wanting to do for quite some time. >> right. so traditional medicare is essentially a guarantee. it is the government saying to

every senior, we are going to provide you with a set level of benefits. and if we have to come up with extra money to do that, we will find the money, we'll change the way we pay doctors and hospitals. but one way or another, you get those benefits. paul ryan's scheme is basically saying, look, we think medicare has gotten too expensive. so what we're going to say is we are going to give each of you a voucher. and this voucher, you can use to buy insurance. you can still go let the old medicare program, allegedly, continue alongside this. but seniors will then have to shop and use that voucher to buy a plan. and the question is, well, you know, you can imagine a system where the voucher was generous enough and there were enough, you know, safeguards, that it would be okay. but what ryan has made very clear, throughout his career, is that he wants to cut the spending to medicare. and the idea is that eventually, that voucher isn't enough to give people the health care that they need, and so slowly but surely, you are breaking that guarantee. you are eroding the guarantee of

benefits that medicare now provides. >> and the excuse that paul ryan makes for wanting to turn medicare into coupon care, into this voucherized system, is that medicare is unaffordable, in the long-term. this is the program that was passed during the great society by lyndon johnson, to try to alleviate poverty among seniors. let's look at the average growth of medicare spending, from 2000 to 2010, as you can see there, 9% from 2010 to 2015, that growth rate isoing to be cut. that's according to the kaiser family foundation. now let's look at paul ryan's plan. paul ryan's plan for medicare, according to those who have analyzed it at the kaiser family found, 59% of seniors would end up paying higher premiums under medicare. i'm quite sure quite a few trump voters were not expecting him to come after medicare. is paul ryan planning to come after medicare for current recipients or think future people? and if it's future people, does that in any way alleviate the structure of the program? >> so ryan, when he first

introduced the plan, was going to introduce this right away. as it became controversial and they were looking for ways to get it through, they said, all right, we'll change that. we'll hold off. we won't, you know, introduce it for the first ten years. if you're 55 or older, you can count on the traditional medicare, just like you always could. but then for 55 and younger, it would change. the problem is, you can't do it that way. as soon as you get that second pool in there, now you have a medicare program for people who are 55 and older, you have the one that's for 55 and younger, how do they balance each other? do the insurance companies go after the healthier seniors? it sounds like a way to sort of save the program, but it really isn't. >> yeah, and it's also, raul, something that i think, again, it's going to surprise a lot of trump supporters that, you know, that ryan now wants to have his way with medicare. but this is what donald trump actually said about medicare, back in december of 2015. take a listen. >> so, you've been paying into social security and medicare, by the way, let's put them in --

because medicare does work. with both, you have tremendous waste, fraud, and abuse. we're going to take care of that, okay? but we're not going to cut your social security and we're not cutting your medicare. >> so, raul, as a political matter, he claims the waste, fraud, and abuse thing is just like a standard line you have to say if you're republican. but he said, we are not going to cut social security, we're not going to cut medicare. >> i think maybe his tag line is, if you are a senior now, which is always, you know, a 55 and older now, which is always an important distinction that politicians make whenever they're talking about reforming medicare, but they know that that group of voters, you know, the average person can't go through the details of medicare, but senior citizens can, because it's their life experience. but there is a certain irony here. is that the people who could potentially lose the most from this are the people, donald trump's base, so to speak, older people, rural people, predominantly white. they could be the real losers in this type of thing. and i think when you look at paul ryan and his obsession with cutting medicare, to me, there

also is an ideological notion involved in it, is that you have to admit, medicare is a successful government program. >> it is. >> that goes against every -- all of the messaging that conservative -- that, you know, contemporary conservatives are putting out. so they need to dismantle it or destroy it in some way, because it undercuts their central narrative, that everything from the government is bad, the government can't run anything well, and it will harm you. >> and you know, nancy pelosi has come out and vowed to hold firm against paul ryan's medicare plan. this has been passed over and over and over. the paul ryan budget has passed dozens of time. republicans are on the record voting to turn it into coupon care. has paul ryan inadvertently given democrats something to sort of rally around and fight for? >> i hope so, because we need it. and we've had this fight before. i used to work for miss pelosi. it was a big rallying cry in the early 2000s when george bush was president. he's taking failed policies of the past -- he, paul ryan -- and right after the election, he said, donald trump has a

mandate. that couldn't be further from the truth. he lost by more than 2 million votes, the highest number ever in history, and he's trying to wrap in these failed policies into his current -- like you said, he's always wanted to privatize -- they want to privatize education, privatize social security, medicare. so we have to fight back, and that's what democrats need to do. organize, fight, push, push, push. because this is the same old failed policy. >> and jonathan cohn, you now have the news that georgia congressman tom price is being considered for the secretary of health and human services, that would administer not just the dismantling of medicare, but also the dismantling of the affordable care act. she is in favor of changing medicare. i'm wondering if you could talk about the politics of trying to do both of those two things, dismantle the affordable care act, which is now serving 20 million people and counting, and people are actually -- the open enrollment is open, so people are signing up for it right now, and attempting to dismantle medicare, simultaneously, earl next year. >> you know, the irony, as you were mentioning earlier, that a

lot of trump voters are on medicare, and probably have no idea they were voting for someone who was going -- might be signing a republican bill that would, you know, privatize medicare. well, the same thing is actually true of obamacare. there was a story in "the times," you may have seen it, i wrote a story about people around the country, there are a lot of trump voters who are ton obamacare. and you know, a lot of them may not realize that, in fact, trump has said, i'm going to repeal it. and tom price is someone who has said over and over again, he wants to repeal obamacare. and there is a common theme here, which is, obamacare, medicare, medicaid. they're different programs, but the common theme is the government stepping in and saying, look, health care is a fundamental right. it is not something that most people can get onheir own. we are going to guarantee that. what you see from paul ryan and tom price is, we want end to that guarantee. we want to take that back. so, you know, i would think that would be -- it's high risk, high reward. if you hate those programs, this is your one chance to get rid of them.

>> do we have katon dawson? i want to go to you on the politics of this. because republicans have been on the record of being against these great society programs, against medicare, wanting to get rid of them, very much against the affordable care act. but to jonathan cohn's point, a lot of their base is on these programs. what are the politics of trying to dismantle the affordable care act, which 20 million people are on, and going after medicare, even if paul ryan wants to do both. >> and touching social security, and the ramifications are pretty stark. donald trump is probably going to live up to his word and leave medicare in place and social security increases or decreases. i'll tell you, the voters now, and you're moving into the baby -- the baby boomers are moving into social security now. those are a lot of republican and democratic voters both. but, paul ryan's on to something here. and that's that $20 trillion deficit that's going to continue to grow. so there's two things that malek trump's aware of. he's aware that at that $20 trillion deficit continues to

grow, it becomes a liability to him, and he's aware if he does not do something with obamacare, the voters that voted him will leave him in droves, because you look at the poll numbers and you'll see, that's what he wants to do now. what he does will be up to his administration. but you walk into harm's way now and run up against what paul ryan sees as the biggest crisis america has ever had, a $20 trillion deficit. >> that's what he sees as the biggest crisis. but as jonathan touched on earlier, talking about the high-risk, high-reward. the key point here is high risk. he is basically -- first of all, the paul ryan framework does not have extensive numbers. it's more or less an outline of what he wants to do. it's not fully fleshed out. it is, in effect, an experiment with people at a critical point in their lives. and this emphasis, this constant emphasis on how medicare is going bankrupt, it actually -- the cost for part "a," and that's the part that has been a matter of concern, the

increasing costs there have been less than the rate of inflation. that's part of a myth that conservatives have been very successful in promoting around the country. >> and part "d," the part that george w. bush added to prescription drug plans was not funded. >> you don't fund that part, and the one thing that could allow you to lower drug costs, negotiating, is not allowed. you said this at the first, you can't overstate it. medicare is one of the most successful social safety net programs in the history of this country. two, obamacare actually lowers costs and extends the life of medicare. and three, the only way you can convince people to wrap up failed policies into this, what they think is a trump mandate, is by lying. and the four-pinocchio rating, paul ryan's statement that obamacare actually raises costs to medicare. we have to get those facts up. >> jonathan cohn, i'll give you the last word on this. when americans talk about they want less spending, if you think of the federal government like a pie, i think what a lot of

people don't realize is something like two-thirds of that pie are taken up by these very popular social programs and military spending. you're left with very little, if you don't touch those programs and your concern is spending, but people also don't want to touch the third that's things that they like. government programs that they actually want. do republicans have a winning argument saying that because of deficits, we are going to have to take away these extremely popular programs, which are not actually going bankrupt. is that a winning argument, or is that going to be much more complicated than paul ryan thinks, jonathan? >> it's impossible to know for sure, but i don't think it's a winning argument. i don't think changing the guarantee of medicare, i don't think taking insurance away from $20 million people on obamacare right now is a ining with argument. i think the republicans will find, if they go down that road, that people really like those programs. and if they start to get taken away, if they start to get weakened, they might face a really serious backlash, much bigger than they realize. >> absolutely. >> fight, fight, fight. >> thank you very much.

katon dawson, we're going to renew for the year 2017 our path that you say democratic, right? >> yes, ma'am. >> all right. i love it. and jonathan cohn, thank you very much. hope to have you back. thank you. coming up, during my trip to england last week, i spoke to some londoners about how they feel about the election of donald trump and its comparison to brexit, you do not want to miss that. ♪ i want a hippopotamus for christmas ♪ ♪ only a hippopotamus will do

at the united states postal service, we deliver more online purchases to homes than anyone else in the country. and more hippopotamuses, too. if you have moderate to severe plaque psoriasis, isn't it time to let the real you shine through? introducing otezla (apremilast). otezla is not an injection or a cream. it's a pill that treats plaque psoriasis differently. with otezla, 75% clearer skin is achievable after just 4 months, with reduced redness, thickness, and scaliness of plaques. and the otezla prescribing information has no requirement for routine lab monitoring. don't take otezla if you are allergic to any of its ingredients. otezla may increase the risk of depression. tell your doctor if you have a history of depression or suicidal thoughts, or if these feelings develop. some people taking otezla reported weight loss. your doctor should monitor your weight and may stop treatment. side effects may include diarrhea, nausea, upper respiratory tract infection, and headache. tell your doctor about all the medicines you take,

and if you're pregnant or planning to be. ask your dermatologist about otezla today. otezla. show more of you. channel islands national park. coronado. saguaro. you'll see there's one that's an eagle. my number one goal is getting more funds out to parks because some animals and plants are only found in one place in the world, and that's in some national parks. i find that's a great cause, and i want to support it. (avo) the subaru share the love event has donated over four million dollars to help the national parks. get a new subaru, and we'll donate two hundred and fifty dollars more. ♪put a little love in your heart.♪

i'm back stateside after a week spending some days in london. while i was there, i spoke to some locals about their feelings about donald trump and brexit. check it out. >> i'm here in london, in front of the houses of parliament, and there's the big double decker bus. and we're going to talk to commuters about brexit versus trump. here we go. which is worse? brexit or trump? >> trump. >> trump. >> trump, definitely. >> i think both are very, um,

difficult. but i think brexit is more worse. >> why? >> because it's one big community, europe, and a very important country, england, is leaving. so i think that's, for the economics, worse. >> neither are great. i think donald trump has potentially worse implications. >> why? >> because brexit sort of stays within our house. it may have some implications been europe, but the main implications are going to be felt here, but donald trump implications could be felt the world over. >> has brexit changed the way london kind of feels for you. >> absolutely. it feels more divisive, where most of london voted to remain, while the rest voted exit. so you feel a little isolated,

but it does change the atmosphere, because you think, do they not appreciate the diversity. do they not appreciate the non-europeans leaving here. >> britain has obviously been some concerns about terrorism. a lot of worries in the u.s. about this idea of a muslim ban is something that -- one of the reasons for a lot of the protests is that kind of a proposal. what do you make of that? >> i mean, for a country that's whole -- its sort of whole ethos is predicated on immigration, obviously, it's very hard to sort of say, we're just going to ban somebody from a certain ethnic group of religious group. >> and as you go around london, i don't know how long you've, in town, do you find people sort of asking, what happened? as an american? >> that's actually when we checked into the hotel, three people at the counter said, what's going on over there? what's going on. >> so is britain literally feeling better about itself, now that we have done trump, even know you guys did brexit? >> i think, yeah, a little

better. >> just be real. >> okay. up next, the latest on the north dakota pipeline protest. stay with us. ♪ see ya next year. this season, start a new tradition. experience the power of infiniti now, with leases starting at $319 a month. infiniti. empower the drive. two words: it heals.e different? how? with heat. unlike creams and rubs that mask the pain, thermacare has patented heat cells that penetrate deep to increase circulation and accelerate healing. let's review: heat, plus relief, plus healing, equals thermacare. the proof that it heals is you.

...ad, and my sweethearts handsome,gone sayonara.rance... this scarf, all that's left to remember. what! she washed this like a month ago! how's a guy supposed to move on! the long lasting scent of gain flings. ♪ i want a hippopotamus ♪ only a hippopotamus will do at the united states postal service, we deliver more online purchases to homes than anyone else in the country. and more hippopotamuses, too. all finished.umm... you wouldn't want your painter to quit part way. i think you missed a spot. so when it comes to pain relievers, why put up with just part of a day? aleve, live whole not part.

painter: you want this color over the whole house?

[ chanting: water is life ] in north dakota, protests continued during the thanksgiving holiday as people vent their anger over the construction of the dakota access pipeline. once again, the tactics being used by police at the standing rock sioux reservation are being called into question. on sunday night, police used water cannons on demonstrators in freezing temperatures. one woman claims her severe arm injury was the result of a concussion grenade thrown by police. police say any explosives came from the protesters themselves. demonstrators say they were hit by rubber bullets and tear gas. the pipeline would carry crude oil from north dakota to illinois, crossing under the missouri river. the primary source of water for the reservation. the tribe says a leak would poison their water and that

construction disruptions their sacred areas. back with me are raul reyes, mark bullard, and eric jean pierre. so "the washington post" had a headline on monday talking about this use of water cannons on the dakota access protesters. the weather was freezing, it's 35 there now, 25 tonight. it's very cold. why would something like that not cause -- not be front page headlines all over the country? >> right. the story has been unfolding for a long time. it's sort of been criminally undercovered for a very long time. so, you know, it was making news during the election cycle, but we've come to the point where, you know, during a campaign, we cover one story. i mean, it's literally election coverage 24/7. october, september, november, all these months. so, this is, obviously, an important story, needed to be covered, wasn't. look, the press does a very bad job, liberal protesters, progressive protesters. go back to the run-up to the iraq war.

they were dismissed, set aside, not important. flip it over, obama hasn't even filled out his cabinets and the tea party protest began and that was nonstop news. so there's a long-running double standard in how the beltway press looks at protester-based ideology, and again, this is just a criminally undercover sturdy. >> to say nothing of the protests at the inauguration in 2000, which many americans the don't even know happened. they don't even know there were massive protests against the inauguration of george bush. you would think it never happened. and mark, the thing that is so disturbing about the imagery of it, is that you have not only water cannons being turned on peaceful protesters, but back in september, you had dogs being used on them. we're going to show some of this video, this is democracy now's video, you literally have a private security film sicci inc dogs on people, on men and women who are protesting peacefully. that imagery is out of the worst

years. >> dogs, water hoses, that's birmingham 2016. there's no question about it. and i've had some of the water protectors on my show. and what they describe is absolutely horrifying. not surprising, though, that it's not being covered, as eric said, because after all, you know, we still, for whatever reason, celebrate this holiday around a myth. >> thanksgiving. >> mm-hmm. around a myth of some type of harmony that existed between the settler colonialists and the native americans and as long as we do that, there won't be a level of appreciation or reverence for what or sisters and brothers who are native people went through. this is their thankstaking. and it's really poignant that this is happening on the very week of what we call thanksgiving, to see something unfold like birmingham. on a personal point of privilege, i actually was one of

the leaders of the 2000 march against -- >> so you were there. you know what happened? >> and eric, it was my only appearance in a major motion picture, in "fahrenheit 9/11" trying to get back in a movie since then. we may not get coverage this year, but we have to think about doing the same thing in terms of a counter-inauguration or a people's inauguration against trump. unfortunately, these things don't get the coverage that they deserve. and quite frankly, during the time of birmingham, coverage was not always plentiful. but at least what precisely happened in birmingham, when dr. king led the children's crusade, when the children were attacked, that brought media in. when selma occurred, abc cut in to the battle of nuremberg, the trial of nuremberg, i should say, and shown that live on television. i'm troubled by what it will take for people to see what this is about. let me just say, the water

protectors are concerned because i think president obama has done what he can to hold things up. they're very worried right now about what a donald trump will do once he's in office. >> they should be. his attorney general nominee is jeff sessions. i want to go to you on this kareem, because you now work for moveon, which was formed in the era when the press's fixation was the impeachment of one william jefferson clinton over a sexual affair, and the hyperactive coverage who now seems quaint now that we have a guy who talks about grabbing women by their private parts, and eh, it's donald trump. so the question is, does activism have to escalate to such a point that it becomes as average as the shocking statements as the man who will be president. he supposedly dumped his stock, according to the "washington post," in which he took a beating, apparently, in his typical not-great businessman fashion, does donald trump having a personal stake in dakota access, does that finally

get the media to pay attention? >> i hope so, joy. look, all weekend, this is a weekend where we should be thinking about native americans, our brothers and sisters, and they are, indeed, on the front lines of the next fight in our generation, which is water. and just the acts that we're seeing against them is just beyond -- it's just beyond cruel. it's just inhumane. and in regards to donald trump, this is what, example 101, of the conflict of interest with his -- with trump university. and it really continues to feed into that question of, will donald trump, will donald trump use the presidency to profit, and that's something that we really need to really think about, because that is very concerning, if that's the case. >> and raul, i think i misspoke, he had about a $500,000 to a $1 million stake in the pipeline, that he dumped for about 50k,

supposedly, according to the "washington post." but donald trump will appoint the interior secretary, the secretary of the epa. he could literally change the face of the west. the part of the country that didn't vote for him. he could seize -- there's 87% of nevada is owned by the federal government. the potential destruction to this tribal land, but to tribal land all over the west is potentially massive. >> but you know what is so troubling about this situation? just look at what's happening now and what has been happening. the lack of media attention and the lack of interest, frankly, by the greater american licpubl means that the rights that these native people have are being disregarded. for example, under federal law, governing native american people, they have the right to be consulted throughout this process, which they are not. there are potential violations of the clean water act, potential violations of the natural environmental protection act. and they obtained an injunction to stop the pipeline, portions of it from being built and the

country went ahead anyway. and by the way, just in case anyone forgets, this pipeline was originally supposed to go by bismarck, north dakota, but it was rerouted, because it was perceived -- they decided, the analysts decided it could have been a threat to the water of bismarck, north dakota. now who is it a threat to? but in a sense, this whole assassination is ups up the marginalization of native american people. this is happening. this is real. >> we are out of time for this segment, but we want to show some video to substantiate, mark. there you are, marching on -- >> you found me. >> we did. i've got a great producing team. they are on the case. >> i had more hair. >> we'll stay on this story, on what's going on in north dakota. i thank you. much more after the break.

♪ i want a hippopotamus for christmas ♪ ♪ only a hippopotamus will do at the united states postal service, we deliver more online purchases to homes than anyone else in the country. and more hippopotamuses, too.

i hope you've enjoyed tonight's special "p.m. joy," but come back for the main event, "a.m. joy" tomorrow morning at 10:00 a.m. eastern. be there or be square. ♪

if you have moderate to severe plaque psoriasis, isn't it time to let the real you shine through? introducing otezla (apremilast). otezla is not an injection or a cream. it's a pill that treats plaque psoriasis differently.

with otezla, 75% clearer skin is achievable after just 4 months, with reduced redness, thickness, and scaliness of plaques. and the otezla prescribing information has no requirement for routine lab monitoring. don't take otezla if you are allergic to any of its ingredients. otezla may increase the risk of depression. tell your doctor if you have a history of depression or suicidal thoughts, or if these feelings develop. some people taking otezla reported weight loss. your doctor should monitor your weight and may stop treatment. side effects may include diarrhea, nausea, upper respiratory tract infection, and headache. tell your doctor about all the medicines you take, and if you're pregnant or planning to be. ask your dermatologist about otezla today. otezla. show more of you.

keeping the power lines clear,my job to protect public safety, while also protecting the environment. the natural world is a beautiful thing, the work that we do helps us protect it. public education is definitely a big part of our job, to teach our customers about the best type of trees to plant around the power lines. we want to keep the power on for our customers. we want to keep our community safe. this is our community, this is where we live. we need to make sure that we have a beautiful place for our children to live. together, we're building a better california.

i like this song. listen. they're over here dancing, i'm the only one on camera. we began this hour talking about russia's possible influence on the u.s. election, but there's other big news about the relationship between the two countries. american movie tough guy steven seagal is apparently a russian citizen after getting his new russian passport, personally delivered to him by vladimir putin. the russian president said he hoped it would be a small step towards better u.s./russian relations. you can have him! s seagal is popular in the country. back with me now are final thought thoughts. how about that for an ending.

mark, what do you think, besides steven seagal becoming a dual russiaamerican citizen -- >> we couldn't believe that was him. >> he doesn't look well. he doesn't look well. but he'll now be able to have some borscht and potato soup and whatever it is they eat over there. >> vodka. >> what's going to be next? >> this supreme court pick. both are awful. giuliani probably worse, because a lot of experience with him here in new york, and he did something worse than -- well, equal to j. edgar hoover. his firm represented the fbi association. they planted that story on hillary clinton, or that faux investigation, ended up not being anything. that's like j. edgar hoover putting an editorial in the memphis paper, telling dr. king to move from a downtown hotel to the lorraine. it's the very, very same thing. but they both are pretty bad. i wonder if mitt is going to do

as he's been asked to do, to get on his knees. but if that's who the choices are of secretary of state, we are in pretty bad shape in our foreign policies and very, very bad shape -- >> but the price is pretty high. john carlo? >> i'm going to embrace the christmas season and look towards hope, and say -- >> you're a hope mongerer. >> we'll hope on the choices that donald trump makes for his cabinet next week, see more women, more minorities, more moderation, and the country's going to feel good. >> and the fact he's already said that he can assault women, that doesn't mitigate the fact that he's going to throw women out there in front of them? >> if there are women like nikki haley step up, that's only good for the country. >> name one. you said you're going to pick more this week. >> ben carson. >> we already picked ben carson. >> we don't have a lot of time.

ben carson has lived in a house, therefore he'll be hud secretary. >> two patricks. they used to say somebody was big in a japan, now they'll say, somebody's big in russia, just like steven seagal. and the second thing is, two democrats in the senate told me yesterday they cannot wait for the senate confirmation hearings, because it's the only chance they can speak against these nominees and speak against people who don't have to go through the senate like lieutenant general flynn. and they're going to ask trump's national security picks at secretary of state or defense, what they think of lieutenant flynn when they're up -- >> are they going to make a big deal out of bannon? >> yes. >> that we will look for. >> i still very much believe that there is only one donald trump and that's the one that we saw during the campaign. and he is going to announce his secretary of state to be rudy giuliani. he's going to continue his gang of hate. and we have to remember, the person who's whispering in his ear, who has the closest, who's going to be his closest confidant in the white house is

steve bannon. >> yeah. i'm going to go around and do a quick round robin. one-word answer. will democrats attempt to compromise or fight. what will they do, not what do you want them to do? >> i think they're going to kroe compromise. mark? >> historically they've compromised. >> they're going to compromise, because they want their voters back. >> their voters don't want them to compromise. >> well, the ones that moved over to donald trump, they were obama voters at one point. >> you think they're going to compromise. >> they're going to fight when they can get attention. >> you think democrats you talked to, do they think there is anything in it for them to capitulate to donald trump? >> yes, but they can't vote against something that brings jobs. >> tax cuts do not bring jobs! that is what donald trump is planning. i am feisty today.

that does it for us and for now we'll be back tomorrow morning, bright and early for "a.m. joy," do not miss it. and you know what's coming up next? "hardball" on msnbc. stick around and eat more turkey leftovers and watch that. how not to run for president and win. let's play "hardball." good evening. i'm chris matthews in washington. when donald trump rode down the escalator at trump tower on june 16th, 2015, to announce his candidacy for president, even those who hoped he would shake things up wondered how long he'd last. his attack on mexican immigrants that day stoked outrage. it was hard finding an expert who predicted that he would end up taking the oath of office. but over the next 17 months, trump