tonight -- what a year. ♪ welcome to a special new year's eve edition of "kasie dc." i'm kasie hunt. it's been an unprecedented year for politics and american history. >> coming from a different world and only be a politician for a short period of time -- how am i doing? am i doing okay? i'm president. hey, i'm president. can you believe it, right? >> now the president closes the book on 2017 with a win. arguably his biggest yet with

historic tax reform clearing congress. but 2018 begins with his polling still in the basement on some surveys like cnn's, he's put forth the worst first year for a presidency in modern history. can he build from here or will he sink back into the familiar habits of social media and picking fights with his own party. joining me is msnbc political analyst and former chairman of the rnc, michael steele. d.c. bureau chief of vice news tonight, shawna thomas. yahoo! news reporter john ward and editor for "usa today," paul singer. thank you all for helping us ring in the new year. shawna, let's start with a little bit of a review of this past year. it certainly has -- >> i agree. mostly because of president trump's twitter feed, you don't

know what is the next thing you're going to have to cover. we had a year of trying to repeal health care and that not happening. a year of tax reform happening and that happened. congratulations to the republicans. we had the transgender military tweet, which president trump tried to change policy with the tweet and we're not sure that's actually possible now according to the courts. you had him attacking an air base in syria. and also possibly really doing something when it comes to isis. a military plan that may have started to have been hatched under the obama administration but has been carried out, and isis has the amount of land they've had since we kind of knew what the word isis was. and every other weird intriguing thing in between, including the russia investigation. >> including that, and we'll get to that in some depth. one thing paul sanger, we're coming off the congress passing tax reform. so we are now talking about accomplishments as opposed to

much -- much discussion about what they failed to, do republicans. but you spent a lot of time covering regulation in government and president trump has really actually made significant difference in how things, how the difficult gover run. >> people underestimate the impact of the trump administration. not only on policy coming out of government but on the infrastructure of government itself. he is -- one of the things interest with the net neutrality rules the fcc issued a few weeks ago, it wasn't just the rules. it was that they also issued a new rule that basically revoked their own authority. what the trump administration is doing is what newt gingrich said he wanted to do. not only make government smaller but make it so small you could drown it in a bathtub. they are essentially removing a lot of the power that the government has traditionally used to regulate and get stuff done and trying to hand it back to the states or eliminate it entirely. >> john ward, what do you think

this first year of trump is going to mean for the republican party in the long term, for conservatives? do they have the same home that they used to, or is the party irreparably changed? >> i think long term, the chances are high that the republican party, it can't recover or is broken apart or this is the beginning of a breaking apart for them. the brand of what it means to be a conservative or conservative republican is kind of lost. and whether conservatives in particular can ever get back to, you know, having a party of their own is hard to know. you have a lot of people like pete wayner n david brooks out there saying i'm a political refugee. >> sounds like you wouldn't say that donald trump is conservative. >> oh, he's definitively not. >> michael steele? >> no, he's not. he's not at all. i agree with jon. i think what we've seen at the surface is something that's been going on beneath the surface since reagan left office. and certainly it came to a head during my time as national chairman with the tea party.

sort of asserting itself. this brand that came out and said we adhere to the constitutional principles that have defined the party and, thus, we will not spend money we do not have. we will not grow the national debt and all these things and lo and behold in the age of trump, that's exactly what republicans in congress are now doing. >> to the tune of $1.5 trillion. >> $1.5 trillion. to listen to members of congress over the last few weeks leading up to the passage of this tax bill dismiss out of hand as irrelevant deficits and the concept of deficit spending, as well as the debt to me tells me, to john's point, we're in a brand-new era for the party and this is not your mom and daddy's republican party anymore. it's the party of trump, and you either are going to be in it or outside of it. >> but there is -- to get back to paul's point. one thing they've done in that republicans on the hill will say, okay, this is great, is they are in the process of remaking the judiciary. in terms of the circuit courts and -- >> which has really long-term

impacts. >> these are lifetime appointments. i was talking to one person who works close to senator mcconnell. he was like the thing i don't think that's covered enough is we've installed a bunch of justices on the circuit court level, and they're not going to go anywhere whether trump is president or not president. now there have been some issues with some of the people the white house has sent over to capitol hill and senator grassley has had some problems getting a few of these people through. >> seemingly totally unqualified. >> seemingly unqualified in a situation where it's totally, like the wheels are greased to get as many conservative justices up there. but that is a win. and that's a conservative win. >> does that keep evangelicals on board? >> the judiciary is big for evangelicals. there's a distinction. i would agree with shawna and paul, there are things happening in the trump administration that are good for conservatives. trump, writ large, is radically nonconservative fig are and so have evangelicals proven

themselves to be nonconservative in their appetite for radical change rather than the conservative ideal of slow, incremental preservative change. >> a little bit at a time. let's take a look. we have some polling from year's end that shows us what this landscape might look like. democrats just completely in a different position than they have been before. in our own nbc news/"wall street journal" poll, 50% saying that democrats should be control congress. that's an extraordinary number heading into the midterm elections. >> it is. i take some exception to that since i had a hand in building the house we currently have. and you realize that you cannot sustain that when the people who are inside the house are tearing up the floor boards and knocking out the windows and putting all kinds of signage on the front lawn that is scaring the hell out of people. i think that is something that the party is going to come to grips with. mcconnell gets it, certainly, and i think you saw after the

loss in alabama, what was the first thing he did? he made it clear who his target was. steve bannon. you want to come after us? we're ready. we'll come after you. so that's going to be sort of the undercard of the bigger fight that we're going to see play out. >> so the civil war is still going to be -- >> the civil war still going, yes. and it's being televised every day. >> where do the democrats in their vulnerabilities fit into this. if nancy pelosi is still running the show for house democrats is that something that drags them down or is the sentiment against the president so intense that that doesn't matter? >> i don't think it matters. it is true there's an argument within the democratic party about the importance of chachblgichachblg i changing a generation of leadership. nancy pelosi is still the best poster child republicans have of why you don't want to elect someone like doug jones to be your senator, but it didn't work because the republican candidate in that case was so much worse and there is an enormous amount

of energy and activism in the democratic base. the question i think you have to ask is, is the sort of trump frustration and to some degree the trump dementia that's grasped the democratic grassroots enough to take back the house. whether or not nancy pelosi is leader doesn't really matter. >> and if they do take back the house, that brings into question a whole different discussion potentially about impeachment and the ramifications of the russia investigation which we haven't even touched on. that still seems destined to dominate the year in the conversation. potentially as the year has closed, the president has seemed at times to be at peace with where that investigation is, but i mean, i have doubts about whether that holds. >> i have real doubts about whether that holds depending on the next time we get an e-mail from the special prosecutor's office saying someone is going to court. you'll have a very hard time not responding to that, especially

as they interview more and more people in his inner circle and as trump's team -- trump's outside legal team meets more and more with the special prosecutor's office. but i also think in terms of next year with women and running for congress, some of that energy, and we've seep that there there's a long list of women considering running for congress in a way we've not seen for a long time. that energy between the me, too, situation as well as -- which i think is almost in some ways a direct reaction to president trump's election, as well as how everything has gone this year. i think there's some energy that will keep on coming from women. i'm curious from you, though, about, do you see the parallels to 2010 for the democrats? >> they're incredible. but the interesting thing is, what i did in looking at the landscape at the time was create a narrative. and so the moniker fire pelosi

was all about -- i remember that in 2010. we the people matter. you krael this. and the only way to fire pelosi is to do what? you know, hire someone else to take the position of a democrat in congress. but that translated to state races as well. when you look at the state race. over 760-plus state house races across the country on this one theme. the key thing for me was not targeting barack obama. because barack obama was not really the root here. and i think that for the democrats, they need to understand it may not be donald trump as the root per se. maybe in some cases, but they'll have to be able to translate that down to get, as we saw in alabama, republicans to do something that goes against their nature. and that is to vote for a democrat. >> jon -- >> okay. good luck with that. >> best of luck. >> question, though.

you have seen democrats approach this in some cases a little differently. i feel like the experimentation with the messaging is in the early phases. there are many in the liberal democratic base who are saying absolutely you will not work with trump or say a word about anything positive about him at all. but on the other hand, tim kaine in virginia will say, if you ask him, i'll work with the president where i need to. in arizona, kirsten cinema is starting to make those arguments. in some cases, i'll work with the president. where do you think that goes. how is -- the path to the majority potent yelly in figuring out how to embrace president trump? >> alabama is a tough comparison because roy moore was such a carbon copy and accelerated version in some ways of donald trump. and so that would have been a state in which doug jones would have had to talk more about economics but all he could talk about is roy moore. tim kaine got up on the stage the night ralph northum was elected governor in virginia and he talked about trump at the top but the bulk of his five,

ten-minute speech was, about we've got to be the party of jobs and the economy. and then ended with hitting trump. and they are very focused on not getting into a food fight on cultural issues with cory stewart, the guy who is running as a trumpian republican there. they want to keep their message focused on jobs message. >> that's the sweet spot. >> and some of these moderate to red states, that's definitely going to have to be the path. >> if i could real quick -- >> it's about trump -- >> you put your mouth into your facial expression which was pricelessless. the example i'd offer up would be that special election in virginia in which a transgender woman won. how did she win? she didn't campaign winning against trump and his clear anning an ing anathema with the gay community but she wonna jobs, on fixing transportation. her opponent ran against her sexual orientation and background and story. and that, for democrats is that

sweet spot. to your point, jon, where you focus that energy and messaging around something that people identify with every day. >> which is why it's dangerous if trump comes out with an infrastructure bill because he'll be handing the democrats something they can agree with him on and agree to work with him on and the republicans are going to be -- don't vote for that guy because he's a bad guy, but he agrees with the president on this. what do we do? >> i was saying when doug jones was talking about policy, he was not talking about president trump all that much in alabama either. yes, that race is totally weird, and i get tharkt, but he had a mission to keep it as focused on jobs in alabama while also sometimes mentioning roy moore. >> he stopped doing a lot of national media and very clearly batoning down the hatchs on the local bread and butter issues. i'm excited to see how 2018 transitions into 2020. we're going to pause this conversation here for now. when we come back, i'll be joined by the crack nbc news

capitol hill team that i work with every day to get their top five list of what to watch for in congress coming up next year. "kasie d.c.'s" new year's eve special is back in just a moment. a lot of water. medications seem to be the number one cause for dry mouth. dry mouth can cause increased cavities, bad breath, oral irritation. i like to recommend biotene. biotene has a full array of products that replenishes the moisture in your mouth. biotene definitely works. it makes patients so much happier. [heartbeat]

eight hundred dollars when wet switched our auto and home insurance.

with liberty, we could afford a real babysitter instead of your brother. hey. oh. that's my robe. is it? you could save seven hundred eighty two dollars when liberty stands with you. liberty mutual insurance.

part of politics is drama. and everybody up here has politics in his blood. kind of like herpes.

i don't think anyone would confuse him with a well-respected health care expert. i wouldn't take advice from charlie sheen either. our folks, every now and then, sort of like a free range chicken. they just kind of move off on their own. you realize to many americans right now that looks like we're giving lindsay lohan the keys to the mini bar. obviously, you'd rather have 52 votes than 51 because you can lose an extra free range chicken. even though it's not perfect, i'm going to vote for it. i'll be on it like a hobo on a ham sandwich. i cannot go down to my overpriced capitol hill grocery this afternoon and choose among about six different types of mayonnaise. how come i can't do that for my kid? >> it makes me a little bit nervous because of those free

range chickens i talked about. >> welcome back to "kasie dc." that was the always quotable senator john kennedy. the chickens did come home for republicans and their tax plan. joining me for our new year's eve party, some of the most important people i work with every day, capitol hill producer alex moe, frank thorpe and producer on the nbc news capitol hill team, mariana sotomayor. they've all brought their top ten things to watch in 2018. for those of us who know you frank thorpe, we'll be unsurprised to learn that you sent seven because you're an overachiever. and i want to start with your number six. you asked, does the gop tax reform bill become the republican obamacare over the course of the next year? what do you mean by that? >> senator mcconnell was asked this after the senate passed the bill. and this is a question republicans and democrats are looking at going into 2018.

whether this bill will be able to be hung on republicans the same way that it -- that the affordable care act was hung on democrats. >> this bill, when it was passed, this bill was more unpopular than obamacare was. and democrats went on to lose several elections. >> correct. but republicans look at this in a different way. senator mcconnell, he thinks of this as an argument they can win. they can go out and sell this. they're going to go out and make a concerted effort to sell this thing. you guys have more money in your paychecks. this is different than the idea the government is now in charge of your health care. now you have money. this is a tangible thing you're bringing home every two weeks in your paycheck. they think they can flip this on democrats. they can look at democrats and point to them and say, sorry. they voted against taking -- giving you that extra money and if you put democrats in charge in 2018 if you vote them into the majority, they can vote these tax cuts away. >> although they do expire in

2025 and most americans are -- congress needs to make sure these become perminent. but this question brings me to, if we can put up alex's top five. alex covers the house for us specifically. that's what this house looks at. and i think to frank's point and, well, yes, it's going to matter a lot in the senate, this question of hough the tax bill plays gets to the heart of your question which is can democrats win back the house? >> republicans really needed to pass a tax reform bill to get a win on the board for them going into 2018. but democrats are saying nancy pelosi said herself before the break that, you know, let's see what happens. let the republicans think that this republican tax plan is going to be good for them because democrats are definitely going to campaign against this. they'll say you're better off having the democrats in the majority. democrats to take back the house need to flip about 24 seats. at this point they think it's doable when you look at alabama, virginia. they are seeing that people

don't like donald trump very much and they're going to take that and run with it when it comes to 2018. >> they seem to be winning the enthusiasm gap by a large margin which tipped us off that 2010 was going to be a wave. >> democrats want to run against president trump in 2018 and they'll try to do that. will republicans try to run against nancy pelosi who some people, even within the caucus want to see stepped down and get a new fresh face in there. that's how republicans were able to win in 2010. able to run against pelosi. >> very interesting. mariana, i want to bring your list up now. you have focused quite a bit on reporting on the intelligence committee investigations. of course, on the senate side and also on the house side which, from what we can tell are continuing somewhat into perpetuity. but i want to pull out your second one is, you know, will we start to see reports from these committees. and what is your sense of what

we might learn from the senate intelligence committee to start? what are they actually going to tell the american people at the end of the day? >> it seems like we're inching closer to getting some reports. on the senate side i was told by senator warner that very early into 2020 so january or february, we'll see at least a report on how russia intervened in the campaigns and just trying to know about election security in general. how secure is the american public? how secure is the system? who have they informed about that already and what can we do now going into the midterms which senator blunt pointed out. some people are going to start voting in march in the primaries. that's something we'll see first on the senate side later on. are we going to see a partisan food fight around how much do you put out in the public on that report do you think? >> on the senate side, i don't

think so. both the republicans and the democrats are really wanting to put out at least this one portion about election security. i think it will be. the house looking at a complete wrap-up of their investigation soon early into 2018. that is looking like it could be a democratic report and a republican report. let's see, probably two different conclusions on both sides of the chamber but we'll see. that, of course, is the story of all of our lives. every day on capitol hill. we have barely scratched the surface of what will be coming up next year. entitlement reform which paul ryan wants to do. whether he'll even stay as speaker of the house. but we have to leave it there. thank you so much for taking the time to join us and for everything you do to support me, to support everybody at our great network on capitol hill. when we come back on this new year's eve edition, some of our big interviews from the year gone by.

we're back from washington right after this. i saw the change in rich when we moved into the new house. but having his parents over was enlightening. ♪ you don't like my lasagna? no, it's good. -hmm. -oh. huh. [ both laugh ] here, blow. blow on it. you see it, right? is there a draft in here? i'm telling you, it's so easy to get home insurance on progressive.com. progressive can't save you from becoming your parents. but we can save you money when you bundle home and auto.

earlier this month, speaker ryan denied reports he's getting ready to leave congress.

ryan told some of his closest confidantes he'll step down after the midterm elections next year though he and his team deny that. ryan has said in the past, it's a job he didn't really want in the first place. i spoke to speaker ryan in october about his thoughts on president trump and the divisions within the republican party. the president has regularly engaged in disputes with various members -- bob corker, ben sasse, over the first amendment. is that helpful to your agenda? >> it's what he does. we kind of learned to live with it. we've had our engagements in the past, too. i don't think -- what i'm trying to get our members to do is focus on doing our jobs. we're here elected to represent our constituents to advance our principles, pass solutions and that's what we're focused on. >> did you ever imagine that washington would be the way that it is now under president trump? >> i think the country is pretty darn polarized. i think one of the reasons why is because the economy has been

pretty darn flat for a long time and there's a lot of anxiety in america. this is one of the reasons i'm so focused on this agenda because it will give relief to this anxiety and give people more confidence in their future. >> is the president helping with that? >> he's criss-crossing the country helping us with tax reform. do i wish he would tweet less? of course i do. he knows that. that's something out of my control and i don't think that's something that's going to change. he's coming around and helping us sell tax reform. is he connecting with people? did this president win wisconsin for the first time since '84 and pennsylvania and -- >> did he do that by uniting or dividing? >> you look at where i come from, he united. he brought people into our party, voting for a republican president, voting for a hotly contested u.s. senate race, and these are democrats that felt like they were overshadowed. we used to call them reagan democrats. now they're trump democrats. he did grow and bring to the party and he put together a darn

impressive coalition. he did end up unifying that front. >> you have said you make it known to him you don't want him to tweet. you've defend his actions by saying he's new at this. he'll get used to it. you didn't go after him by name after charlottesville. during the campaign you said in the wake of the "access hollywood" tape that you would never defend donald trump, not now and in the future. i've heard from some critics of you who they are republicans and they don't necessarily recognize the republican party under trump and they're disappointed in you. >> that's fine. they can view that however they want. the best thing i can do is hups improve an agenda that improves people's lives. we had unified government. it's important to make this unified government work. imagine if we decided just to have some internal food fight and get nothing done for the country. how does that help people get a job or more take-home pay? how does that help relieve the insecurity people have living

paycheck to paycheck? it doesn't. if we want to play some d.c. game of fighting each other and get nothing done, maybe that would satisfy a few people. but as far as i'm concerned, i'm elected to defend the constitution, to represent people in wisconsin, to help run congress, to improve people's lives and you do that by getting things done and in this unified government we have, we have a tremendous opportunity to get big, good things done. that, to me, is the most important thing i can contribute to. >> you mentioned internal food fight and your majority which is a nice segue into my question about steve bannon who is quite frankly picking a food fight with a lot of your incumbents in the senate and the house. are you afraid of what steve bannon may do? i think we're going to be fine if we do our work and get our jobs done and pass our policies. i think it's -- >> is he helping the republican party? >> i don't think it's helpful to have internal fights or go after republicans? what's most helpful is if we all unify around our common goals

and purposes and get an agenda passed. i don't think having these fights are helpful but at the same time, i don't think it's going to deter us from doing what we're working on right now. >> are the messages steve bannon is sending to the republican base helpful for the country? >> to be honest, i'm not paying that close attention to it. i'm a little busy with a day job. i don't even know what you mean when you say messages. i'm making sure we get our messages passed. >> he works for breitbart. >> i have three stories in my life, death, taxes and attacks from breitbart. i'm so used to that that you don't spend time thinking about or worrying about things outside of your control like that. >> much more to come. just ahead, my conversation with senator rand paul. we'll talk about the un-civil war that's broken out inside his party. and we continue on this new year's eve edition of "kasie dc."

i love kiwis. i've always had that issue with the seeds getting under my denture. super poligrip free. it creates a seal of the dentures in my mouth. just a few dabs is clinically proven to seal out more food particles. try super poligrip free. ♪

it was an interesting year for senator rand paul of kentucky. he didn't fall in line with all of president trump's agenda. notably opposing the president on health care. and then there was the incident at senator paul's home in early november that left him with several broken ribs. a neighbor pleaded not guilty to a misdemeanor assault charge. just a few days before that happened, i spoke to senator rand paul about his relationship with president trump, divisions within the republican party and

what's ahead in 2020. there's a civil war going on inside your party. the president said bob corker could not be elected dog catcher in tennessee. is that presidential? >> you know, i think there is a bit of a war going on and to me it's interesting because i'm sort of also at war with my party a lot of times, too. but i'm at war on sort of policy differences and whether we should balance the budget, have spending cuts, and that's a fine place to be. in fact, i've had -- >> do you think he's conducting himself -- >> i'm getting there. i'm getting there. but when you keep it on policy. so, for example, i'm opposed the president on major policies this year. on the fake obamacare repeal, obamacare light. i've opposed him to several bombing in syria, things like that. but we still have a very good relationship because i don't attack him personally. what i would say is going on, and it's not one-sided. it's like when you are a kid and your parents say it takes two to fight. it's a little bit on both sides. on one side there's this high mindedness that they're going to

condemn the president's character. but in doing so, it's sort of like perfect people can condemn other people's character. and if i tell you, kasie, i think you're immoral and a thief and a liar, do you think we can have a conversation? we can't do that. and so the thing is, i think we should avoid sort of character assassination or condemnation. you can. you're a pundit. you can say whatever you want about a president. if we're working together, i'd say it's a better thing. i'm more than happy to go to war with the president on occasion and also support him many times as well on policy. but i try to refrain from making judgment about his character because when i'm perfect -- >> does character not matter for the president? >> of course it does. but when my character is perfect is when i can start criticizing other people. so there is -- people who live in glass houses need to be aware of that. and i think it is a holier than thou thing and there's a lot of it going on on y'all's side in

the media as well but it's going on with some politicians as well. to tell you the truth, what are the american people more concerned with? they probably think, this is a "people" magazine saga that really we should be getting onto policy. they would rather see a debate and discussion on policy. but i would say it's both sides. it's not one side or the other. both sides are engaging in this. and i, frankly, am choosing to be in another place. >> i feel you still haven't answered my question. >> i gave a really long circuitous description of my position, haven't i? here's the -- >> would you conduct yourself this way? >> i think everybody is different. the president has a unique style. but people have attributes and other things people say it's not an attribute. when i look at the president and when i work with the president, i see the glass as half full. we're from the same party. many things aligned and i've been around the president many, many hours, probably as much as

anybody in the senate, and i choose to engage him on the things that i think we have common ground. so for example, bombing syria, we -- i disagreed with the bombing in syria. i disagree with a lot of the military intervention the president has chosen to do. but i choose not to confront him on that or other -- particularly things of personality difference. i choose not to engage on that but i choose to find common ground. i love his cabinet and the supreme court pick. i love the fact he's gotten rid of more regulations than any other president in recent history, including most of the republicans. >> is mitch mcconnell a good leader? >> when we look at like obamacare, i promoted that we should repeal it. and i forced votes on that. >> yes, or snow, no, is he a go leader? >> i'm getting there. but on repealing obamacare, he was right there with me. as far as wanting to repeal the whole thing. he also worked with a coalition to be for a bill that i wasn't for. so once again, i oppose mitch

mcconnell sometimes on policy, but i keep it on a level such that i think we have good relations and do i think he does a good job herding the cats that are up here, the disparate, different philosophies, right, left and middle? it's a difficult job. he does a good job with it. >> very last question and this is also a yes or no question. would the country benefit from a republican presidential primary in 2020? >> i think no one can stop primaries from happening and there could well be a primary that happens. before you even get to that, you need to know, is president trump running for re-election. you won't know that until his second, third year of presidency. at this point, i can't see myself supporting anyone but president trump because i think he's given us the most conservative cabinet we've seen since reagan. maybe more conservative than reagan. we've repealed regulations for the first time in 20 years. a great supreme court justice. i'm hoping he gives us a couple more if we have retirements. i see the glass as half full.

doesn't mean i agree with him on everything. if we could end the afghan war, that's who i would support. i don't think that's going to be an alternative to president trump. so i like to accentuate the positive, the things i agree with him on. >> still not a yes or no answer but thank you. >> i think we need a primer. >> i think it's a pretty good answer that we have no idea. you can't answer a question -- >> i asked if it would be good for the party. my interview with senator gillibrand whose insistence that al franken resign was a watershed moment among democrats in the senate. dads don't take sick days... dads take dayquil severe. the non-drowsy, coughing, aching, fever, sore throat... ...stuffy head, no sick days medicine.

tcan lead toof plenty of questions. fortunately, there's a place to get the answers, for them and for you. find articles, tips and tools from experts and others who have been in your place. the caregiving resource center at aarp.org/caregiving.

replace the full value of your totaled new car. the guy says, "you picked the wrong insurance plan." no, i picked the wrong insurance company. with new car replacement™, we'll replace the full value of your car

plus depreciation. liberty mutual insurance. this year, new york's junior senator managed to anger both president trump and the inner circle of her political patrons, the clintons. earlier this month she called on president trump to resign because of longstanding allegations of sexual misconduct. he fired back by calling her a lightweight who would do anything for a campaign contribution. in november, she said bill clinton should have resigned the presidency over the monica lewinsky scandal and philippe reines called her a hypocrite

after accepting the clintons money and endorsements. i asked her about her relationship with the clintons and her fight to stop sexual harassment on capitol hill. >> what is different about the context of congress and politics that makes people so afraid to come out and either name the people that they're talking about or show their faces in public? i've talked to probably a dozen women in politics, even as this movement has become so public and none of them want to go on the record. why do you think that is? >> i think they're afraid of retaliation. >> why are they more afraid here than -- >> i think they're afraid everywhere. people in hollywood didn't come forward for years and years. people on wall street don't come forward for years and years. i had a girlfriend who just sent me an e-mail that she sent her old boss about all the things he did to her that he never took these claims seriously. and this is 20 years later, 30 years later. it's a moment of reckoning and what's happening in congress is i think young staffers are afraid that their careers will be ruined if they come forward. and so i am calling on my

colleagues to rewrite the rules so if you are being harassed in your office, not only can you -- do you know where to go because nobody knows where or what the office of compliance is. what do you do when you get there? what's the process going to be? do you have to do you have to go through mandatory remediation. they should pay if there's a settlement. it should not come out of the taxpayers' dime. >> we're in a moment that this has sort of changed, that the context has changed over the last 20 years. you've told "the new york times" that bill clinton should have resigned over the lewinsky affair. >> my point is that the tolerance that we had 25 years ago, what was allowed 25 years ago will not be tolerated today, is not allowed today and that we have to have the kind of oversight and accountability that society needs so that we can protect people in the workplace, so people can function without having an unsafe work environment, whether

it's in the military or -- >> so you're saying president trump has created an unsafe workplace in the white house? >> no. i'm saying that the conversation we're having is very important and the behaviors tolerated a long time ago are not tolerated and, in fact, all of us need to recognize none of us are above this and all of us have to be responsible for how we create a workplace in our own office, for my office, how we do our oversight in congress with providing better oversight over the military, which is our job, with title 9 on college campuses. so we have to do our job. we are all responsible and we all have to understand that time has changed a he with he have to hold people and elective leaders should not be held to the lowest standard. they should be held to the highest standard. that's why i focus all my efforts of trying to change the rules of the game because they are not fair and not working. >> so you're saying if bill clinton were there today and the

events were unfolding today -- >> i think it would be a very different conversation. we should have a very different conversation about president trump. >> should president trump resign based on the allegations? >> i don't want him to be president. >> but he is president. he got elected. >> agreed. >> so we should now have a conversation that that is not okay and we should not just ignore him. we should be having a much larger conversation about what we expect of our elected leaders and that it should never be this lowest common denominator or boys will be boys. that's an outrageous statement to be said. it's not okay. we expect much more. that's why the roy moore debate is on top of everybody's mind. his behavior is disqualifying in the same way to me that the president's behavior was disqualifying. that was my view. now my job is to try to protect other people. >> some people have worked for the clintons over the years that are essentially questioning your

loyalty. there was a very tough tweet that says, the senate voted to keep president william jefferson clinton but that's not enough for you, senator gillibrand? interesting strategy for 2020 primaries. best of luck. what do you say about that? >> ridiculous and he's wrong. bill clinton did very important things for this country but my point is the conversation that we're having today and we need to have the highest standards for elected leaders and we have to change what's happening throughout society and we have to allow people to tell their stories. that is what this is all about and that is why the me, too, campaign is as powerful and is as important as it is. >> when we come back, our political panel on what to watch for in the year to come.

[hawaiian music playing]

i mwell, what are youe to take care odoing tomorrow -10am? staff meeting. noon? eating. 3:45? uh, compliance training. 6:30? sam's baseball practice. 8:30? tai chi. yeah, so sounds relaxing. alright, 9:53? i usually make their lunches then, and i have a little vegan so

wow, you are busy. wouldn't it be great if you had investments that worked as hard as you do? yeah. introducing essential portfolios. the automated investing solution that lets you focus on your life. welcome back to kasie dc. it's new year's eve and almost 2018. i'm back with my panel. before we go, i want to get your sense, what should we be watching for in the year ahead? >> i think you watch for how republicans triangulate between the narrative that evolved in 2017 around trump, the me, too environment and the results of those elections and how they tried desperately to hold on to the house and keep control in the senate. >> paul? >> i set a google alert for the

administrative procedure act because every regulation that the trump administration is trying to roll back, they are being sued in court for violating the administrative procedures act which requires taking a bunch of steps and proving it's a good idea. where the courts are the bull work to stop the rollback in the courts. that's what trump's opponents have to win on. if they lose on that, trump has the authority to roll back the ru rules. >> and these are particular changes to deal with in the day-to-day news environment. >> it's impossible to follow because we're following the tweet of the morning. >> what are you looking for, john, in 2018? >> politicians who are not going to give simple answers and say they are going to fight the other stide and voters who say it's complicated. i've been disappointed that for the past decade we've had both parties get control and ramped up through without getting the other side involved and it's bad for the country and we need to

take that in hand. >> do you think that's possible in the new social media environment that we're consumed with? >> i don't know if it's possible, but of course it's possible in some way. what it is is it's necessary. >> i'm not going tounds any of it. and i think i'm watching what happens with deferred action for childhood arrivals. i think the daca question is one that is big on immigration and will come up in 2018. everyone thinks that it's going to get done but didn't get done this year. so i think we have to see how republicans and democrats actually see together on that and see if we find some type of path to legalization for those kids. >> a lot riding on that. i personally am watching for what happens to the democratic party. do those divisions crack open the way we saw republicans in 2010? they may have swept in to washington on a wave but it was downhill from there in some

ways. that does it for kasie dc in 2017. thank you so much for joining us. we will be back in 2018 every sunday from 7:00 to 9:00 p.m. eastern. for now, good night from washington and happy new year. fake news. >> congratulations, mr. president. >> i am outraged. >> i hope there are tapes. >> this trump and russia thing is a made-up story. >> we're getting nothing done. >> violated my body. >> it was disgusting. >> he mashed his lips against my face. >> 2017 has been an unbelievable year. the most outrageous, the most surprising and exhausting. the greatest number of have you