what he's changed to become is one who has proposed some of the most racist bigoted policies. when he was talking right, we took pictures with him and welcomed to him to our events. when he went left, we stood up for what was right. is he promoting racism. >> two views there of donald trump's history, long history in new york. we wanted to show that to you. that is our show. "hardball" with chris matthews starts now. >> we're talking showdown. let's play "hardball." ♪ good evening. i'm chris matthews in new york. for weeks now, the prospects of a face-to-face showdown between donald trump and special counsel robert mueller loomed like a dark cloud over the white house. as the president's lawyers attempt to get favorable terms for his testimony, "the new york times" is now reporting that

trump's legal team is telling the president to refuse the special counsel's request to question him. according to four people briefed on the matter "lawyers for president trump advised him against sitting down for a wide-ranging interview with the special counsel." their concern is the president who has a history of making false statements and contradicting himself could be charged with lying to investigators. however, refusing to cooperate with the special counsel's request for a voluntary interview carries the risk mueller could hit the president with a grand jury subpoena, a move that would quickly escalate the potential legal battle all the way to the supreme court. in january, nbc news reported the president's attorneys were seeking potential compromise that could avoid an encounter with mueller all together. now his lawyers is appear to risk a possible legal 0 showdown. they believe the special counsel might be willing to subpoena the president and set off a showdown

that mr. mueller could lose in court. besides being politically dead wrong i believe the advice of his attorneys stands at odds with the president's own public statements just last month. trump not only said he would be willing to speak with mueller but that he was looking forward to it. >> are you going to talk to mueller? >> i'm looking forward to it actually. >> do you have a date set, mr. president? >> no, just talking about two or three weeks. i would love to do it. again, i have to say subject to my lawyers and all of that, but i would love to do it. >> to reach a higher standard, you would do it under oath. >> yeah, absolutely. >> with an ultimate decision expected within weeks, the question now is whether trump's attorneys will prevail in keeping the president away from mueller and if so whether the president will be served with a grand jury subpoena. joining me is the author of that story michael schmidt, "new york times" reporter and an msnbc national security contributor.ken dilanian from nbc news and kim whaley, former assistant u.s. attorney.

michael, congratulations on this piece. is this all subsequent to trump saying he'll meet with gladly meet with mueller? >> well, it's what they've been saying to him for some time now. they are deeply concerned about what the president not only would say in terms of his truthfulness but how he may go on and on. the president likes to talk and thinks he's his best spokesman. in a situation like that, he could open up a lot of avenues for the special counsel by going on about different things. he speaks in hyperbole. there's concerns and the lawyers think there's no good outcome, no upside to this. at the end of the day, this would probably lead to a legal showdown that the president very likely could lose. that would force him to talk anyway. it seems like they're in a very difficult position. >> why do you think the lawyers are advising him to put it off,

if at best they can do is put it off and force a subpoena, then he has to go before a grand jury with all that drama without a lawyer present. that's no deal at all for him, is it? >> i think there's two things going on. one is they're trying to negotiate with mueller. they're trying to get the best terms possible from mueller about a potential interview and want mueller to narrow the subjects he wants to talk to the president about, perhaps allow the president to provide written responses. my guess is that mueller is not going to go for that. some of this is negotiation. on the other hand, they think mueller may not go through with the subpoena. he may this is not worth the fight in court and may forego trying to speak with the president. a lot of folks who know mueller and the type of prosecutor he is find that hard to believe but for folks on the trump side, they think it might be worth it to take that risk. >> ken, you've been watching this case as long as anybody. do you think after all this had, the special counsel would put

off in any way the chance to interview or to question or interrogate i should say the president? >> no, i absolutely don't think that robert mueller or any prosecutor would be willing to settle for written questions for example, that he's going to look the witness in the eye and but i don't happen to think that donald trump's lawyers will let him anywhere near that interview. we're leading toward a situation where the president of the united states may assert his fifth amendment right against self-incrimination and refuse to talk to the grand jury once he gets a subpoena. for most politicians that that would be a damaging situation. the whole memo and all these attacks on the mueller investigation are the way the trump team is laying the groundwork where donald trump can say i can't get a fair shake from this guy. >> ken, would that work? cojust say i'm taking the fifth? >> he would still have to appear before the grand jury and then he would have to answer each

question with invocation you have his fifth amendment rights. i worked on the whitewater investigation. susan mcdougal refused to answer three questions and held in contempt and jailed for 18 months for failure to answer those questions. there's not an option if there's a subpoena for the president to sit back and say i plead the fifth and not doing anything. that's not an option on the table for him. >> a political friend of mine moon in philadelphia once said if you're not going to run again for office, take the fifth. he will run for re-election, ken. isn't that a risk to say you took the fifth, you would incriminate yourself if you told the truth? you're saying you're guilty to the vote he, not to the jury necessarily. to the voter you say i don't want to at the truth because that will get me in trouble. >> there are certainly political implications to that for sure. you're not going to plead the fifth amendment if you're going to tell the truth and there's zero implications if you do tell

the truth. that's problematic. with this president, he seems teflon when it comes to those kinds of risks. i wouldn't be surprised if he's willing to take that risk. >> i guess if he says he can shoot somebody on fifth avenue, i can take the fifth. robert mueller and his investigators have been thorough in their investigation as "the washington post" reported. "people who appeared before mueller's team say prosecutors have detailed accounts of events sometimes to the minnesota and have surprise witnesses by showing them e-mails or documents they were unaware the team had or their colleagues had written." the prospect trump would be outmatched by the prosecutor would be why his defenders are warning him not to cooperate. >> under no circumstances should he grant mr. mueller an interview. it's a suicide mission. it's a very clear perjury trap. >> if you ask me, don't do it. i don't care what format, i don't care what circumstances. don't do it.

there's nothing to gain. >> my strongest advice to the president is to never be interviewed by mueller. >> in your reporting, michael, these people, are they saying stonewall it? in other words, don't just stand up to request for voluntary interview but go ahead and take the fifth in whatever legal manner don't do what bill clinton did, sit down and give discovery? don't give testimony, period? >> well, i don't know if they're all lawyers those folks. i don't know how much they're thinking about stonewalling versus the fifth or whatever. i think there's a wide standing belief amongst the president's allies and amongst legal experts in washington that there is no upside. there is only downside to this. the problem is that means it will go to court and this will go all the way up to the supreme court and there will be some judgment that would likely force the president knee this. while that advice seems to make sense in the short term, it seems to protect the president from either an overzealous bob

mueller or the president from himself, this is something that is ultimately he's going to have to confront. and as the other folks are pointing out, the president can survive this politically. he survived so many things politically. the idea of him saying this is rigged, i don't want to participate, i'm going to take the fifth, he could probably get away with that at least in the public's mind. that 35% of his base it wouldn't change their mind. with the supreme court saying he had to do it would it change anything? i don't know. >> is there an assumption mueller can't make his case without the president's cooperation? in other words, if he can't get the president to come forth with the facts, can he still make his case to the public? do you think he needs the president? >> i don't know if he necessarily needs the president. he's talked to a lot of the white house officials. mueller has a pretty good sense whether the president obstructed justice. i don't know what ha finding is. from the documents handed over by the white house and the hours he has spent with folks in the

white house counsel's office and aides he has an idea of what the president did. but at the end of the day, do you want to hear from that person because at the heart of this are his intentions. what were his intentions about the comey firing, about how he handled the flynn investigation? what were his motivations? you're going to want to know from that person what were the factors behind what they did. so it's, you know, it's an important part, important piece of the puzzle. now, do i think mueller would wait around for several years fighting this out in court? i don't know. >> ken, if he doesn't testify, coalways make his case in public and trump could wait for whatever comes from the special counsel and then make his statement on national television in primetime in a roadblock situation where every network has to cover it. he has so many ways of making his case. why would he want to make it in testimony under oath? >> i agree. look, this is a guy who in a

2000 deposition was pound to have lied 30 times. it would be dangerous for any the most prepared witness to sit down with these prosecutors with robert mueller. for a guy like donald trump, it is absolutely perilous. at the same time, we should understand how abnormal it would be. as you've said, bill clinton testified before a special counsel's grand jury and george w. bush sat down for an interview. normally when presidents are asked to give evidence, they do so because to refuse would be politically peril house. >> nich on turned over his words in taped form. they had to release the tapes. for months, trump's legal team has told the president the special counsel's investigation would soon be over. first by thanksgiving. that's last. then by christmas, then the beginning of the new year. now times has confirmed what many long suspected. privately people close to the president have conceded assuring mr. trump the investigation would end by a certain date was primarily aimed at keeping him from antagonizing mr. mueller on

his twitter feed or in interviews. michael, the reporting the president was being babied by his own attorneys to keep him quiet. >> look, i think there is a deep fear in the west wing that the president will do something else to imperil himself and his presidency. i don't think many people thought he would go forward with the comey firing but he did, and it led to mueller and has cast an enormous cloud over the administration. he has spoken publicly and privately about firing a wide range of other folks since then. whether it was asking mcgahn to fire mueller, whether it was asking sessions to resign, whether it was talking about getting rosenstein to resign. these are things that he has obsessed about and talked about. and i think that folks in the white house would say if they're being candid that they are afraid that he will do something like this, that he will try another firing that will make his political situation even

worse. i think they're deeply concerned about republicans on the hill particularly in the senate and whether he would lose some of them if he were to do something this extreme. i think a lot of this, a lot of ty cobb's job is managing the president. >> let me go back to kim for a constitutional question. no one in our office seems to have it figured out. kim, suppose mueller decides that the congress isn't going to do anything with his report. that the legislation, the democrats verbatim taken control next year if it comes out next year and it's up to the republicans and they're not going to do anything with his report. coindict the president? >> yeah, so there's a constitutional debate on whether a sitting president can be indicted. though on the one hand, we've got at office of legal counsel opinion from the early '70s saying no, the president has to do his job and to knock him out with a criminal indictment co would put the country in crisis

and we've goat leon jaworski in watergate, ken starr in whitewater having the opposite view saying a sitting president can be indicted because we can't have anyone in government above the law. i think that's a better reading of the law. since 1973, we've had clinton versus jones in which the supreme court held a sitting president can be subject to a civil lawsuit and actually participate in a deposition, notwithstanding his other duties of office. so and in addition, as someone mentioned the special prosecutor, it was actually the independent counsel under whitewater, that was a separate statute that congress created. court upheld that even though in that instance, the president didn't have control over that prosecutorial process. that doesn't interfere with his ability to do his job. i think it's a difficult difficult road. but all things considered it seems like he's willing to take that. we've got a president here who unlike bill clinton and other

presidents isn't respecting norms and if we go down this road, it's going to inflict unnecessary trauma on our constitutional trauma somewhat like the nunes memo did. prior presidents respected the norms. >> back in the '60s we had acceptance of objective fact. i'm not sure we have generally accepted fact anymore. it's horrible the way our country has come to not having agreement what the reality is. republicans buy into this memo thing completely. thank you ken, thank you michael and kim. where the responsible republicans as trump and his allies attack the very institutions of his country. trump's going after law enforcement, the fbi and the democratic opposition as treasonous. and top republicans sit silently or in today's republican party, is everything just a game? plus clinton confidante lanny davis is here to make his case

jim comey cost hillary clinton the election in october of 2016. and later we'll try to figure out the logic of those on the far right blaming president barack obama for yesterday, that's monday's nose dive on wall street. they're actually saying that even though obama's been out of office for over a year. finally let me finish tonight with trump watch. won't like this one. ncestry dnas are that i am 26% nigerian. i am just trying to learn as much as i can about my culture. i put the gele on my head and i looked into the mirror and i was trying not to cry. because it's a hat, but it's like the most important hat i've ever owned. discover the story only your dna can tell. order your kit now at ancestrydna.com. ♪ cleaning floors with a mop and bucket is a hassle. swiffer wetjet makes cleaning easy. it's safe to use on all finished surfaces.

trapping dirt and liquid inside the pad. plus, it prevents streaks better than a micro fiber strip mop. for a convenient clean, try swiffer wetjet. so allstate is giving us money back on our bill. well, that seems fair. we didn't use it. wish we got money back on gym memberships. get money back hilarious. with claim-free rewards. switching to allstate is worth it. steve bannon's testimony before the house intelligence committee has been postponed a third time. amid intense negotiations over what lawmakers will be able to question him about. today the committee's top democrat, u.s. congressman adam schiff from california released a statement saying the white house is prohibiting bannon from testifying beyond a set of 14 preapproved yes or no questions. he says bannon has been barred from discussing matters related to the transition, his time at the white house and his

communications with the president since leaving the administration. meanwhile, nbc news has learned special counsel mueller is likely expected to meet with bannon sometime next week. we'll be back. (vo) do not go gentle into that good night, old age should burn and rave at close of day; rage, rage against the dying of the light. do not go gentle into that good night. ♪ ♪ ♪

♪

i really believe this is just the beginning. you know, paul ryan called meet other day and i don't know if i'm supposed to say this, but i will say that he said to me, he has never ever seen the republican party so united, so much in like with each other. but literally the word united was the word he used. it's the most united he's seen the party. i see it, too. >> so much in like with each other. welcome back to "hardball." it's taken a year but the president and his republican colleagues are finally on the same page. amid it the manufactured scandal of the so called announce memo the republican party closed

ranks around the president using the dubious memo as cover for the president as long with arguing the dangerous game of the fbi was down to take down trump. >> can you imagine if the shoe was on the other foot and george bush or karl rove paid for information and george w. bush's administration opened an investigation. it's what happenses in banana republics. >> this is about holding our government accountable and congress conducting oversight over the executive branch. >> the smoke screen campaign is working. a new poll shows 73% of republicans about 3/4 believe members of the fbi and the department of justice are working to delegitimize trump through politically motivated investigations. just three years ago, more than 80% of republicans had a favorable view of the fbi. i michael gershon warns all this comes at a significant cost. he writes, with the blessing of republican leaders the lick

spittle wing of the gop is firmly in charge. existence of reckless partisans such as announce is not surprising. cowardice among elected republicans is staggering. this is a rare case when the rats rather than deserting a sinking ship seem determined to ride it all the way down. for more, i'm joined by michael steele, former rnc chair and contributor and adolph foe trank co, republican strategist. give me your thoughts about the republican party today and the way it changed its public view, all the members of the party. republicans who vote republican don't like the way the fbi does business now. >> i disagree with the whole premise that republicans don't like what the fbi is doing. republicans are concerned about specific individuals at the fbi and positions of authority including the deputy director now resigned. immediately after the review of the announce memo what was going on, who was being manipulated.

this is no different than, and you remember this. >> give me the list of fbi people you believe that your party is talking about when they say the fbi. >> well, when you have something such as mrs. comey referring to this dossier at one time as salacious and unverified, the fact that it was three times put before a court, a fisa court without divulging all the information regarding its unverified sources. how is this different than the 1970s when the church committee was looking at abuses of certain fbi directives taking place at that time. this is exactly the same thing. i think the scandal was on the left. how could anybody disagree with what the speaker has just said that there has been a clear abuse by some individuals not the fbi for political, potentially for political purposes. we all know the cherry picked facts are on the other side. >> let's get to the particular, do you believe it was right of

the fbi to check out whether carter page was dealing on behalf of the russians or they were using him? >> i think all the information needed to be put before the fisa court. i don't know if the court would have issued a warrant if the entire information on the dossier -- to date, mr. page has been charged with nothing. >> do you think he's above suspicion? >> but suspicion isn't benarily enough -- every american should view this as a chilling moment if just suspicion is the basis for a warrant. >> let me just ask you cold, if you heard somebody was bragging about being acadviser to the kremlin and in the midst of this whole investigation as to what role the kremlin played in interfering with our election, wouldn't you want to know how the kremlin used the guy who claimed to be their adviser, an american? >> sure. >> wouldn't you want to check him out? >> if additional information was required beyond a dossier that was clearly politically moat have aed. >> they've been watching this

guy -- we know they're watching this guy since 2013, long before he was in cahoots with trump. why wouldn't you want to look at the guy? >> you can look at the guy. the key hinge is the use of the fisa court and warrant. >> your architect is -- >> procedures are important in this country. >> you believe there was an abuse by bugging carter page? that was abuse in. >> i think there was an abuse of the fisa process here and how the warrant was obtained. there's no question about that. i don't think can dispute that. >> i want you to look, michael, at a basketball player who plays for oregon ducks, dylan brooks. take a look. look how he flopped twice and fell to the ground last year when he wasn't touched. it's called a fake foul. my contention is the trump people are pretty good at a fake foul. president has convinced three-quarters of his party members he's been fouled. your thoughts. >> there's a lot of flopping

going on right now. and the problem that i have and i have a great deal of respect for adolpho but i have to disagree with him here. i cannot believe that any self-respecting republican particularly one sitting on the house intelligence committee, actually believes that not one, not two, but four fisa court judges were duped, that they shirked their responsibilities not to look at the evidence produced which has to be produced not just what you gave us before, but the additional stuff to get the additional warrant. that this process broke down the way that the everyone claims it did. it did note by my estimation. my years of practice in the law and working in litigation with folks, i've never seen that process break down to the degree that would lead us to where we are. secondly, finish and to the speaker's point, i agree with the speaker. they have an oversight responsibility, chris, and they failed at it. you mean to tell me from the time this story first broke to the present day, it just

occurred to them that now they're concerned about oversighting? what level of oversight was taking place to see when those warrants were being gotten before, what evidence was being produced? all the concerns that are now around this process to me are wholly phony because they fit a particular political narrative as opposed to the facts. and that's the problem i have with what i see right here. just objectively looking at it. this isn'tent anti-trump or pro trump but looking at a legitimate process set up by the could yours and the congress and you cannot tell me that there was nos oversight to the point that we're now at this stage. i think this is wholly irresponsible. >> the latest gallup poll, president trump's overall approval rating notched up to 40%. it's the highest since may of last year. the main factor increased support among republicans. 90% of republicans now approve of president trump's performance as president. and the president's approval

rating among independents remains stuck at 33. adolpho, why do you think the republican approval is going up inside the party but no advance among independents who decide lac elections. >> i'll tell you why for republicans first. i have the same equal respect for our former chairman. but i don't believe mr. chairman, that 75%, 0% of republicans have this wrong. the vast majority of congress. >> they're not inside the game. they're being told. >> i'm a lawyer, too. procedures are important. i know three instances to go back to the facts on this, no, the fisa court was never a prize of the totality. >> how do you know that? >> because we know that. >> who told you that. >> mr. mccake made these statements. >> who told you that? >> we'll know when the other memo comes out. >> the procedures were not followeded.

>> who is saying the procedures were not followeded? >> mr. mccabe. >> he did not. >> he has said that. >> i've got one more bite at this and into going back to the republican support is, this is at the end of the day a realization by the vast majority of republicans that there's everything done by people in washington by elites by people in certain political positions in washington for a long period of time to undo this administration. i think this is now coming to be not only a realization but a strong sense of support among republicans. >> thank you so much, michael, thank you dolpho. up next, what cost hillary clinton the 2016 election? a new book -- in a new book, long-time clinton confidante puts the blame squarely on james comey. he joins me next. [mascot] hey-oooo! whoop, whoop! [crowd 1] hey, you're on fire!

[mascot] you bet i am! [crowd 2] dude, you're on fire! [mascot] oh, yeah! [crowd 3] no, you're on fire! look behind you. [mascot] i'm cool. i'm cool. [burke] that's one way to fire up the crowd. but we covered it. talk to farmers. we know a thing or two because we've seen a thing or two. ♪ we are farmers. bum-pa-dum, bum-bum-bum-bum ♪

tripadvisor compares prices from over 200 booking sites to time to bask... in low prices! find the right hotel for you at the lowest price. refreshing, isn't it?. tripadvisor.

you or joints. something for your heart... but do you take something for your brain. with an ingredient originally found in jellyfish, prevagen is the number one selling brain-health supplement in drug stores nationwide. prevagen. the name to remember.

it was incredibly painful choice but not all that hard between very bad and catastrophic. i had to tell congress we were taking these additional steps. >> welcome back to "hardball." that was james comey last may jufing his decision to send a letter to congress just 11 days before the 2016 presidential election reopening that hillary clinton e-mail investigation. in his new book "the unmaking of the president, 2016," lanny davis pins the blame for that what followed squarely on james comey. davis writes, spb hillary clinton lost the 2016 presidential election and donald trump won it for the single decisive reason that fbi director james comey wrote his infamous letter to congress on october 2th, 2016 announcing is the discovery of a laptop

computer belonging to anthony weiner that contained thousands of copies can of clinton's e-mails." he adds all available preversus post poll data indicates hillary clinton would have won the election had he not sent the letter. deputy attorney general rosenstein wrote i cannot defend the director's handling of the conclusion of the investigation of secretary clinton's e-mails. i do not understand his refusal to understand the nearly universal judgment he was mistaken. i'm joined by lanny davis, former special counsel to president bill clinton. thank you for coming on. your book is provocative. step by step, should comey, rather the fbi as an institution, should they have grabbed hold of that laptop from anthony weiner on october 3rd? >> of course and because they waited till october 30th it, took them six days to verify there was nothing there and on

november 6th, two days before the elections mr. comey whispered in a letter, sorry nothing there. had they acted on october 3rd when they told mr. comey they found the e-mails six days later is october 9th. hillary clinton wins the election. >> your argument is james comey, the fbi director at the top knew about this laptop the very day they picked it up? >> he was told october 3rd according to many reporters. >> according to reporters, okay. >> yog impugn anybody's motives. they slow walk this had to the last minute. >> why did they slow walk it? >> it might well have been the bureaucracy of the fbi that it took a long time to get to washington to make a decision wlgs 0 seek a warrant. it's just poor judgment. i know that it took them six days to verify there was nothing there. >> i'm with you on that. let me ask you about the motive because the trump people are now saying for those three weeks, that was a slow walk to help hillary, that they were keeping it away from the public to

prevent hurting her. >> it's contrary to evidence. >> they're saying it. >> if they had started on october 3rd, they would have ended six days later on october 9th and hillary clinton's, the headlines for the last four weeks would have been hillary clinton cleared, nothing there. instead of under criminal investigation which is what happened in the last 11 days. >> i'm completely with you on the numbers and how this affected a close election and this did nothing but damage the last 11 days. anybody watching right now it hurt her badly in the key states of wisconsin, michigan, pennsylvania. i just want to ask you this though. the guy really on trial is not hillary clinton. it's really comey. i ask you what, do you make of comey you? spent all this time writing this book. is he a partisan one way or the other? >> no, i think he's a nar sissist. >> what do you mean? >> because by his own words and i don't use labels, but nar sissism. >> it is a label.

>> but i'm about to define the facts that support the label. james comey as you just had a quote from him and rod rosenstein had it write right, i get to decide when i'm going to publicize something that nobody allows me to in the justice department because i work for the justice department. i james comey decided to go to congress 11 days from the election which is contrary to 50 years of justice department policy. why? because i james comey get to decide. >> i thought he committed to it publicly and that's why he did it. >> no, he did not. what he told congress was if something new comes up, i will take a look at it. he never looked at a single clinton e-mail. >> you're saying he never committed in spirit to the congress to keep them to update. >> or a letter. >> never. the exact words he used and i quote them in my book, if something new comes up, i will take a look at it. he never looked at the e-mails before he sent the letter to the congress that defeat hillary

clinton. >> what do you think would have happened if he kept it secret? >> in six days they would have cover discovered sorry, oops, there's no there there. >> i completely agree with that part. you believe he would have been able to get away with that with the republicans in congress? they wouldn't have said that wasn't helping in hillary. >> it's not a reveal or conceal choice. you are the fbi director. you report to a prosecutor. the justice department decides to prosecute. if you're going to announce anything publicly whether it's it's extremely careless handling of e-mails or a let other congress, you must go through the justice department. if you go public, you do it only through an indictment. you don't accuse and change into this is a political show. tell me what you think about the role of rudy guiliani? please tell me what you believe was his role in hurting hillary at the end? >> fact on the 25th of october, three days before the comey letter, mr. giuliani went on

television and said hawaii, something's coming. on october 28th, before the letter was written he went on the hulu let show and said i have heard something bad is coming. giuliani and many of the new york city fbi agents have been identified as leaking to pressure james comey to reopen an investigation that turned out to be a nothingburger. >> so they were the ones being political, comey was acting institutionally or you said nar sissistcally. everybody watching who really cared about what happened in 2016 and don't like how it came out will listen to this. do you say the chain reaction began with politics in the new york office of the fbi and led to putting pressure on comey and he acted basically on his own instincts or whatever you want to call them. >> i don't doubt his sincerity. i think he put himself above the justice department, above what is fair and not affecting an

election and the historic lesson is never again should we allow any appointed elected official must less an fbi investigatory affect a presidential election by his own decision and not at least honoring justice department policy. >> did secretary clinton get a look at your book yet. >> yes. >> what did she think? >> she and i back in law school used to say facts, facts, no adjectives, facts. that's what i did. >> she sees facts in the book. >> she thinks i proved the case factually. i wanted to jump in in michigan, pennsylvania and wisconsin, those three states on october 28th, she's ahead nationally by 6%. more than obama beat romney in october 28th in the three states i just mentioned she's ahead by 6, and 7 and 7% in ten days she crashed and lost

each state by less than 1%. she would have been president. >> you made your case on the electoral college. the book is "the unmaking of the president in 2016." up next, president obama's been out of office more than a year. that hasn't stopped some on the right for blaming him for yesterday's stock fall. why does he continue to be their cape goat for snfrg you're watching "hardball." it lets you know where your data lives, down to the very server. it keeps your insights from prying eyes, so they're used by no one else but you. it is... the cloud. the ibm cloud. the cloud that's designed for your data. ai ready. secure to the core. the ibm cloud is the cloud for smarter business. on the only bed that adjusts on both sides to your ideal comfort, your sleep number setting. does your bed do that? right now, our queen c2 mattress is only $699, save $200.

ends soon. visit sleepnumber.com for a store near you. two,that was awful. why are you so good at this? had a coach in high school. really helped me up my game. i had a coach. math. ooh. so, why don't traders have coaches? who says they don't? coach mcadoo! you know, at td ameritrade, we offer free access to coaches and a full education curriculum -- just to help you improve your skills. boom! that's lesson one.

education to take your trading to the next level. only with td ameritrade. we have one to two fires a day and when you respond together and you put your lives on the line, you do have to surround yourself with experts. and for us the expert in gas and electric is pg&e. we run about 2,500/2,800 fire calls a year and on almost every one of those calls pg&e is responding to that call as well. and so when we show up to a fire and pg&e shows up with us it makes a tremendous team during a moment of crisis. i rely on them, the firefighters in this department rely on them, and so we have to practice safety everyday. utilizing pg&e's talent and expertise in that area trains our firefighters on the gas or electric aspect of a fire

and when we have an emergency situation we are going to be much more skilled and prepared to mitigate that emergency for all concerned. the things we do every single day that puts ourselves in harm's way, and to have a partner that is so skilled at what they do is indispensable, and i couldn't ask for a better partner. welcome back to "hardball." president trump and his supporters have spent the past year taking credit for economic gains that starred under the obama administration. but after the stock market dropped yesterday, sean hannity claimed it was president obama's fault. let's listen. >> because the obama economy was so weak all of these years, we had just artificially cheap money. what's cheap money? cheap money is when you can borrow at ridiculously low

rates. the error of cheap money at some point has to come to an end. >> today the dow bounced back of course, but president trump himself has a history of blaming his predecessor. let's watch. >> to be honest will, i inherited a mess. it's a mess. at home and abroad. a mess. in the last eight years, the past administration has put on more new debt than nearly all of the other presidents combined. the iran deal made by the previous administration is one of the worst deals i have ever witnessed. >> this is obviously out of control. the levels of hatred -- i'm not talking about trump. you go back throughout the eight years of obama. >> they asked me, what about race releases in the united states? now, i have to say they were pretty bad under barack obama. that i can tell you. >> let's bring in tonight's

"hardball" roundtable. ginger gibson from reuters and eli stokols an msnbc political analyst. i start with clarence on this. you're one of those comedy guys, in the 30s and 40s, they talk about how poor they were and how tough it was. these trump, all he does is talk about how rough it was. obama came in during a recession, the worst recession in our history next to the great depression and he bailed us out and got us through it and this be guy is acting like nobody remembers that. >> i think that president trump depends on the short memories of folks out there. it was funny to hear him talk about all the debt that obama ran up because trump is already on track to beat obama's record on that. but this is the way politics is played in the mind of donald trump. everything that's bad that has happened is because of obama, everything that's good that's

happening it because of him. even in the same day. >> but ginger, here's the problem. to pinpoint one day a monday in february a year into your term more than a year in to your term and say this day is obama's fault after saying day after day after day this great news is me, i did this but there one day sean hannity says this is all obama. don't they laugh? don't them have tissue rejection? even i'm a right winger, enough. >> it's important to remember this day came after trump's biggest legislative victory he claims was the reason the market had gone up as far as it had in the last month. there's the ability to just sort of wave your hand and say pay attention over here. don't look what's happening over there. he's banking someone who may be saw the news about what the markets did on monday saw him accusing democrats of treason or blaming obama and waves it off. when they get to the polls in

november, they'll say no, trump told me that was someone else's fault. >> if you're retired and watching fixed income and you don't have a chance to make new money that, market thing scared the heck out of you yesterday. it was a good opportunity for people on the right to say blame the left. >> there are people who communicated with the president in the last 24 hours and said this is why you don't want to take credit too much for the stock market. you want to talk about other things in the economy. this is a president who doesn't listen to advice if he doesn't want to hear it. why did trump run for president? first birtherism, then obama ripped him at the correspondent's dinner. trump's always been obsessed with barack obama. he played a brand of white identity politics that galvanized people who had a grievance about the fact they had to live through two terms of barack obama and much of the presidency so far the unifying thread has been undoing the things obama did trying to undo the iran deal, tpp, saying that

every deal done by obama and other presidents would have been a better deal if he was there. this is something that feeds trump's own ego and a big part of that is writing a different story than the story that we know about the obama years. >> i never thought one of his goals as president is to drive obama down on the list of great presidents to do that personally. the roundtable will stick with us. you're watching "hardball." whoooo.

looking for a hotel that fits... ...your budget? tripadvisor now searches over... ...200 sites to find you the... ...hotel you want at the lowest price. grazi, gino! find a price that fits. tripadvisor. i'm sorry, leo. i know i'm late. traffic on the ponte vecchio on a monday. always late. oh! my wallet! un momento. card lock from capital one. instantly lock your card. in case your card goes... arrivederci. mona! that smile. technology this convenient... could make history. what's in your wallet? so take a look at this. that's my my coxrv producer and

chris long of the super bowl champion philadelphia eagles with the lombardi trophy. that's the actual trophy. chris and some teammates will be on the tonight show tonight on nbc. we'll be back with "hardball" and the roundtable and three big scoops for tomorrow. we'll be right back. or make a back seat that feels nothing like a back seat? why give it every feature you could want, along with a few you didn't know you needed? it's simple. you can build a car, or you can build a cadillac. come in now for this exceptional offer on the cadillac ct6. get this low-mileage lease on this 2018 cadillac ct6 from around $549 per month. visit your local cadillac dealer. there'swhatever type ofhe end of eweekender you are,ton.nth. don't let another weekend pass you by. get the lowest price when you book at hilton.com

today, smart planning is helping the new new york rise higher than ever. as the world leader in unmanned aerial systems, we're attracting the world's best talent to central new york. and turning the airport into a first-class transportation hub. all while growing urban areas into vibrant places to live and work.

across new york state, we're building the new new york. to grow your business with us in new york state, visit esd.ny.gov. we're back with the "hardball" roundtable. clarence, tell me something i don't know. >> i know you care a lot about bobby kennedy's son chris kennedy and his race for the governorship in illinois. he got a big boost today because the chicago tribune ran old fbi tapes of blagojevich talking to j.b. pritzker, chris kennedy's principal opponent for the governorship talking about who to replace barack obama with in the u.s. senate seat. they got to talk about reverend jeremiah wright and a number of other black folks. it makes great listening. pritzker is already apologizing. >> i'm sure it's a break for

chris. jinger? >> let's do math. president's tried to bring a lot more attention to ms-13 gang members paint the children immigrants dreamers as being like those people. if you did the percentages and compared it, only .28% of the population of children immigrants would be daca -- would be ms-13 members based on the largest estimates. that's the equivalent of comparing the population of the state of delaware to the entire population of america or 1.2 members of the united states house to represent the entire chamber. >> eli? >> i don't know if you caught it today but john kelly on capitol hill adopting a trumpian rhetorical trick projecting your own sort off incendiary feelings that you can't out loud on to some imagined other person. yesterday donald trump beak saying someone had had told him it was treasonous for the democrats not to stand and cheer during his state of the union. then he agreed. today kelly an serred other

people might say it was lady for the daca eligible kids not to enroll and get off their you know whats. very telling and another example how the people around trump don't change him. he changes them. >> sure sheer richard nixon. that's how he did it. it's always somebody else said something about the communists to the supreme court. thank you. when we return, let me finish tonight with trump watch. you're watching "hardball." wemost familiar companies,'s but we make more than our name suggests. we're an organic tea company.

a premium juice company. a coconut water company. we've got drinks for long days. for birthdays. for turning over new leaves. and we make them for every moment in every corner of the country. we are the coca-cola company, and we're proud to offer so much more. today, you're recognizing two promotions. mom: "hey, kids, i'm home. what do you want for dinner?" hers to manager and yours to grown-up. with blue apron, any night is a chance to see what cooking can do.

trump watch, tuesday, february 6th, 2018. remember how scared you were back in 2002 and 2003 when an american president with limited talent talked this country into war? that scared me because i like to believe we're a hard to convince people. it took pearl harbor to get us into world war ii. how do we let a president of limited book learning and rhetorical ability lead us to we needed to attack iraq? those were saudis on those 9/11 planes. now comes the memo. how does labeling a little screed attacking the fbi become a document. not up there with the declaration of independence or martin luther's thesis but how did this dodgy california congressman known for taking midnight rides to the white house to pick up dirt to the democrats get the credentials to

start publishing documents worthy of all this hushed whisperings and concerned conversation what might in its front contents? think we've been duped again. and that's "hardball" for now. thanks for being with us. "all in" with chris hayes starts right now. >> tonight on all-in." >> let's have a shut down. we'll do a shutdown. >> president trump's shoutdown threat. >> i'd love to sheep a shutdown if we don't get this stuff taken care of. >> tonight as the white house suggests immigrants are too lazy, the president's new threat to get his radical overall of american immigration. >> shut it down. we'll go with another shut down. >> why steve bannon was a no show in congress today. >> great day. thanks, guys. >> by the president's lawyers, why they don't want him talking to robert mueller. >> the witch hunt continues. >> the republican push to impeach judge who's ruled against their gerrymandering in pennsylvania and