so, when the president said he saw no reason why it would be russia who meddled in the election, he really meant wouldn't and he believes the kremlin is targeting america, he was just saying no questions. it is thursday, july 19th. joe and mika have the morning off. i'm willie geist and sam stein and republican communication strategist and msnbc political contributor rick tyler and former aide to the george w. bush white house elise jordan and associate editor of "washington post" jean robinson and former justice department spokesman and now msnbc justice and security analyst matt miller. good morning, everybody. >> good morning. >> whip lash -- >> will, you just stole my word. >> the word of the day. following this president down

the trail, yes, they targeted, no, they didn't. where are we in all this? or are we back where we began which is we believe the intelligence agencies when they say there was interference in the 2016 election and president trump doesn't want to say clearly it happened. >> for one of the first times i had flash back to the very beginning of this presidency when on inauguration day i was standing on the route for his motorcade and it was raining. we were all in ponchos and the president said, the sun is out. the sun was not out. he is asking us to not believe our own eyes when we see him say these things. we see him speak the words and then the white house tells us that that's not what they meant. that's not what happened. so, i think, they're doing a very messy job of cleanup and if the goal here is to protect the president's reputation a, they e

doing the exact opposite. i will tell you what they're doing that iserary disturbing, there was a poll out that said only 35% of republicans believe there was actually russian election meddling so the confusion and the exhaustion that this is creating is real. >> the same republicans believe that the investigation into it is a distraction. let's plain what we're talking about here. the white house tried to move past the fallout from the helsinki summit, but this moment from the president's cabinet meeting started it all over again yesterday. >> is russia still targeting the u.s.? is russia still targeting the u.s., mr. president? >> let's go. we're finished here. press, let's go. >> thank you very much, everybody. we're doing very well. we are very doing well, doing very well, probably as well as anybody has ever done with

russia. >> had a chance to speak with the president after his comments and the president said, thank you very much and saying no to answering questions. >> what is going on? >> since there is currently not an election today, not specifically. >> so despite the video that shows the president, and despite multiple people in the room responding to the question and the president never said no, no and usher the reporters out of the room. >> this is thefirst thing the president said after the question was asked. thank you very much. and he said, no, i'm not answering any more questions. even further, even cecilia didn't realize what the answer was because he asked for clarification and he didn't answer the follow up. i talked to the president, he said he wass en't answering questions. >> this is the second time that

the white house came out and reversed what the president has said. >> actually, i'm interpreting what the president said, not what he said. i was interpreting what the president's intention was. >> the white house's official transcript shows the president responding no to the question, is russia still targeting the u.s.? and no to the follow up question asking for clarification by the reporter who was inside that room. rick tyler, we're playing games here but we know where the president stands because he stood up on the stage and stated pretty clearly where he stands. >> he did it in all the context surrounding it and the would to would and not to not and no means no and yes means no and means i'm not taking questions. the president received an intelligence briefing from the previous administration when he came into office. and he convinced himself in that meeting when he was shown that

the russians, this is "new york times" statement, he was convinced they were trying to convince him that the russians actually interfered in an election and that putin was direct directly responsible for that. this is a great conspiracy and a great plot by the obama administration to convince him that he didn't win the election and that the russians actually interfered in a way that made him the president and, therefore, he was a -- he was so convinced of that narrative, he was never able to let it go. that resulted in the disastrous meeting with president putin. >> i think that is a generous explanation. because his secretness towards putin has predated that briefing, which happened -- >> i don't disagree with it. remains two great mysteries. what happened in the meeting and what is on donald trump's tax returns. i think they're related.

>> jean robinson, just to go back, there was a briefing given on january 6, 2017. the president was two weeks away from his inauguration with the highest ranking intelligence officials in the united states laying out chapter and verse in very clear terms how president putin himself directed cyberattacks during the election. >> read the story. not only gave him the sort of well-documented evidence, some of it came from a super secret source close to putin. so secret that the existence of the source was not even contained in president obama's presidential daily briefing. was restricted to an even tighter circle. just the president and a few other people. donald trump was told in no uncertain terms. but the highest ranking intelligence officials and people who know all the secrets that there are to be known that it was putin. that it was him personally who

directed this. and, you know, to rick's point, is the president delusional or is the president just simply lying? and i -- you know, that's not exactly. it's not mutually exclusive. but i think he's lying. i mean -- >> we're all talking about the aftermath of the summit because of all these antics and because of the back and forth and would versus wouldn't. we're talking about, you know, it's really asinine in my opinion when all that matters is the image of vladimir putin and donald trump on monday. what donald trump said at that press conference and what vladimir putin said and the strength that putin projected and then donald trump just looking like a fan boy to an autocrat. i go back to, i don't know if you watched "snl" this election season but he would get so

amused with himself that he would start laughing sometimes as he would do the skit. that was literally putin as donald trump was talking about election meddling. he just lost the kgb. if you go back and watch it without sound, his body language. putin can't believe what is happening. >> a lot of smirking from the president of russia. so, yesterday, president trump sat down with a second interview with jeff glor of cbs after all this no, no, what did he say and what did he mean? here is what he told jeff glor yesterday. >> you agree with u.s. intelligence that russia meddled with the election in 2016. >> i said that before, numerous times before and i would say that that is true. yeah. >> but you haven't condemned putin specifically. do you hold him personally responsible? >> well, i would because he's in charge of the country. just like i consider myself to be responsible for things that happen to this country. certainly, as a leader of a

country, you would have to hold him responsible, yes. >> what did you say to him? >> very strong on the fact that we can't have meddling and we can't have any of that. look, we're also living in a grown-up world. will a strong statement to president obama supposedly made a strong statement, nobody heard it. >> he denies it. if you believe u.s. intelligence agencies, is putin lying to you? >> i don't want to get into whether or not he is lying. i can only say that i have confidence in our intelligence agencies as currently constit e constitut constituted. i think i did great at the news copferenc conference. i think we did extremely well and the press makes up -- look, it's fake news and people understand. the level of dishonesty in your profession is extremely high. >> the press covered the substance and the wording of that press conference, actually. >> by the way, we still don't know, sam stein, what happened in that room for two plus hour. we may never know.

i just want to remind people dan coates twice in the last six days went to remind the american people that the warning signs are blinking red about russian interference and christopher the director of the fbi in aspen told lester holt my view has not changed one bit. >> two things. you say we don't know what happened in that room. that's true. not just us. but there is a truly remarkable "washington post" story about how top officials in this current administration, the dod, secretary of state or state department, i should say, simply don't know what kind of verbal agreements were struck between vladimir putin and donald trump. that is really almost frightening thing to think about. the people who implement policy are trying to figure out what the policy is. >> it's not frightening. it's terrifying. we are moving ahead to implement the agreements that were made in this meeting that we know

nothing about. >> didn't we just do the same thing with kim jong-un. deals with dictators part two. the only proof that you need about how strong the president was in that meeting is the fact that vladimir putin emerged from it seemingly having no pressure to take any responsibility for what russia did. >> the second thing i want to talk about is the piece you referenced in "the times" is remarkable, too. i think in some ways and i would like to throw this to matt, if possible. clearly, some of the intelligence that the "new york times" got is highly sensitive. and the fact that it made its way into print suggests to me that people in the intel community have gone past their threshold of tolerance for what is going on here. that they're willing to actually reveal some of these methods which normally would not be made on a front page of a major newspaper. so, matt, as someone who has been in that world and that universe, as you read that piece and you saw some of the methods

being described by "the times" in terms of intelligence gathering, did that strike you about what is happening behind the scenes? >> it absolutely did. two key pieces of information in that story. one, the fact that the u.s. intelligence had obtained texts and e-mails of senior russian officials and made it clear that putin was involved. and, two, even more importantly that there was a human source close to vladimir putin who was cooperating with the u.s. intelligence community and providing information. that was key to this conclusion that putin had directly ordered the intervention in the election. that is really the crown jewels of u.s. inteliance and the fact that it made it out publicly was concerning to me and i will say, after i found out, after i read that story last night and found that the president has known going back to a year and a half now about what exactly vladimir putin did and he helped him cover up that crime by lying about it it publicly and help

him cover up that crime by standing up on monday and lying about it pub lacklicly and it m u.s. intelligence officials wonder what happened in the meeting. why that president wanted to have that meeting all alone with no other officials there, not even his closest advisors. i can't believe this is something i'm saying about the president of the united states. but it made me wonder if people are suspicious that he revealed sensitive, classified intelligence including human source information to the president of the russian federation. that is a real concern that i had after reading the story. >> you're not the first person to raise that suspicion publicly and privately around this table. what is our best hope and bring the interpreter is that likely and, if not, how else will we know what happened? >> it is a dramatic step that would be completely unwarranted. you can make a good policy case for why the executive needs to be able to have confidential

conversations with a foreign leader and that an interpreter should be subject to oversight. in this case when the president's actions are under such a cloud and he's come out and help vladimir putin cover up a crime. no other way to put it. that's exactly what he's done. i think that interpreter ought to be subject to a subpoena from congress. republicans joining that call. ought to come up and testify public pu privately, not publicly first. but there needs to be oversight so elected officials know exactly hot what he promised to president putin. >> another extremely troubling aspect with the president's meeting. the white house seems to be entertaining whether to permit russian prosecutors to question some of vladimir putin's biggest critics here within the united states. the proposed exchange would allow robert mueller for russians indicted to meddling in the 2016 election.

something president trump described on monday as, quote, an incredible offer. >> russian authorities yesterday named several americans they want to question they claim was involved in crimes in their terms, including former ambassador to russia. does president trump support that idea? is he open to having u.s. officials question? >> the president will meet with his team and we'll let you know when we have an announcement on that. >> was that a topic that came up in their conversation? >> there was some conversation about it, but there wasn't a commitment made on behalf of the united states and the president will work with his team and we'll let you know if there is an announcement on that front. >> the russian prosecutor general's list includes former michael mcfaul which leveled sanctions on the human rights abuses. including the death of bill

brouder young lawyer. in monday's news conference, accused him of funneling stolen money tahillary clinton's campaign an allegation which he denies. >> i can't answer on behalf of the white house with regard to that, but what i can tell you is that the overall assertions that have come out of the russian government are absolutely absurd. the fact that they want to question 11 american citizens and the assertions that the russian government is making about those american citizens, we do not stand by those assertions that the russian government makes. >> so, that's the tale of two responses. had state department says it's absurd. the idea of bringing a former ambassador and sending him to russia for some kind of show trial or show investigation. bill brouder who has been a thorn in putin's side for many years now. putep would like nothing more than to get him on russian soil. yet, the white house says it's

entertaining the idea. >> it was the most authoritarian statement that has come out of this white house to date. the perporepospreposterous idea he would send michael mcfaul to russia to be questioned, questioned by vladimir putin. and it's absolutely disgusting and there should be bipartisan outrage over this one for sure. >> there really has been outside of the white house. and we saw it publicly on twitter. we saw this from statements from various statements and the white house didn't go there. >> it's a real window into how donald trump views his power. and how he views his power alongside vladimir putin. they are just trading their people as pawns. >> remember, he twice in the press conference with putin, twice said this was such an interesting idea. this is such a remarkable offer. >> let's say we forgive his

impulsiveness on that. they had days now to know this question was coming and why does the state department have the right answer and how do you think that happens? >> they have different bosses. that's why. >> has to say, mr. president, i cannot go out there and endorse this incredibly stupid idea. >> she's afraid to do that. michael mcfaul is a critic of donald trump and she's afraid to go out and say anything nice about him. anything that would protect him. because the president might freak out. >> and just to be clear, so the people understand, this act is everything. this is putin's number one goal because a lot of the money of him and his cronies is frozen overseas. this has been going all the way back to trump tower when we talk about adoptions, we're talking about the magnistsky act. >> notably similar to what was known in the talking points that

she brought with her to trump tower in june 2016 in that famous meeting with the president's son and the top campaign officials on the promise of providing damaging information about hillary clinton. matt miller, bill browder lobbied for the magnitsky act and vladimir putin would like nothing more than to have bill browder on russian soil. >> this meeting on monday was not the first time that president trump had a private meeting with president putin. we know trump said it it publicly that one of the things that putin raised in that meeting was the magnitsky act. this has been a long-term desire and they raised it with the trump campaign first and with the trump administration on repeated occasions. look, i go back to what happened

in this meeting. we saw the president come out, as eugene said, very intrigued and bringing it up twice. i'm curious what he said privately about that meeting. he knows who michael mcfaul is and he hears appointee and he has to know that michael mcfaul is a critic of his. when president putin raised this idea, i'm sure trump's mind doesn't go to the legalities and what the process would be and he thinks, i see this guy on tv and he criticizes me all the time. not such a bad idea. >> we'll speak live with ambassador michael mcfaul in just a little bit about that request. russian interference aside, another big issue playing out on capitol hill. president trump's pick for the supreme court. democrats think they just found a big problem with the nomination of brett kavanagh.

so, how's it going? well... we had a vacation early in our marriage that kinda put us in a hole. go someplace exotic? yeah, bermuda. a hospital in bermuda. a hospital in bermuda. what? what happened? i got a little over-confident on a moped. even with insurance, we had to dip into our 401(k) so it set us back a little bit. sometimes you don't have a choice. but it doesn't mean you can't get back on track. great. yeah, great. i'd like to go back to bermuda. i hear it's nice. yeah, i'd like to see it. no judgment. just guidance. td ameritrade. and now for the rings. (♪)

i'm a four-year-old ring bearer with a bad habit of swallowing stuff. still won't eat my broccoli, though. and if you don't have the right overage, you could be paying for that pricey love band yourself. so get an allstate agent, and be better protected from mayhem. like me. can a ring bearer get a snack around here? until her laptop crashed her salonthis morning.or weeks, you never know what the day's going to bring when you're running a small business, it might even bring a blue screen of death. having it problems? ask a business advisor how to get virus and spyware removal, and 24/7 tech support. office depot now offers on demand tech support for as little as $15 a month. ♪ right now, buy one hp ink and get a second at 30% off at office depot officemax only tylenol® rapid release gels have laser drilled holes. they release medicine fast, for fast pain relief.

tylenol®

this morning, new and personal details about the russian national charged with operating as an influence agent of the kremlin. as a detention hearing in washington, d.c., yesterday. prosecutors said she should remain in custody because she is a flight risk. prosecutors said she had made preparations to lead the country. bu it, butina's lawyer said she made no attempt to flee. she used sex and lies when trying to gain access to american political organizations. prosecutors say they observed butina aged 29 in an unnamed

person -- butina seems to treat it as a necessary aspect of her activities. according to the filing that she alleged offered another individual -- butina complained about living with u.s. person one and expressed disdain for continuing to cohabitat with them. let me pause there for one minute. matt miller, help us take a step back here and her feelings about her live-in boyfriend. why she is a significant figure in all this. >> you know, when you travel overseas for the executive branch, one of the briefings you get, the one i remember the most is when a young russian woman approaches you in a hotel bar and starts making conversation with you, she's not that into you, actually. there is an agenda there and it sounds like, you know, maybe some people at the nra and some other conservative activists

need to get that very same briefing because it sound like she was doing a lot of work on the right. look, the significance, the significance here, i think, is, look, we're seeing a vast russian effort to infiltrate policymaking. how they tried to influence u.s. policy by electing donald trump. we see in this investigation how they're trying to influence u.s. policy by infiltrating the nra and using connections to get close to republican politicians. and i will tell you, this kind of influence operation is something they've tried for years. we arrested ten russian illegals, that was the name of the program when i was at the justice department. the kind of thing that they have tried to effect for a long time. and the question you have to ask is, why the nra and other organizations on the right were so vulnerable to this infiltration by russian intelligence agents. they had deepening ties between

the nra and russian officials for some time and you have to ask a question how deep these connections go. >> a former setback for paul manafort, a federal judge in d.c. denied to cease evidence in an fbi raid on his home. manafort's attorneys argue it was broad and unconstitutional and judge amy jackson disagreed. the warrant was not too prod in scope. this is in regard to manafort's second trial and also set to go on trial in virginia on wednesday and seeking a delay there. manafort faces a range of charges for failing to register as a foreign agent for ukraine. matt, put this one in perspective. why does it matter? >> manafort has filed a number of files in these cases. asked to have his cases moved to roanoke and he has lost over and

over again. i think what we see is on the other side for manafort, an investigation that is carefully and meticulously arranged and executed. to the point that when manafort comes to court and asks for these kind of far-fetched motions and seen him routinely knocked down by two federal judges. he will go to trial next wednesday. between now and then he has his last chance to make a deal with a government and tell them whether there is anything he has to give up before trial because otherwise it looks like he will go to trial and the evidence against him is really, really overwhelmi overwhelming. >> we could learn new things about the trump campaign in that trial. another pwe'll go inside th issue of "time" magazine next on "morning joe." (vo) lately, i've been selective

about what i eat. this beneful select 10, has 10 amazing ingredients! (avo) with real beef, plus accents of sunflower oil and apples, suddenly your dog's a health nut. (vo) the old me woulda been all over that. (avo) beneful select 10. 10 ingredients. 1 thoughtful recipe. a hotel can make or break a trip. and at expedia, we don't think you should be rushed into booking one.

that's why we created expedia's add-on advantage. now after booking your flight, you unlock discounts on select hotels right until the day you leave. ♪ add-on advantage. discounted hotel rates when you add on to your trip. only when you book with expedia. - anncr: as you grow older, -your brain naturally begins to change which may cause trouble with recall. - learning from him is great... when i can keep up!

- anncr: thankfully, prevagen helps your brain and improves memory. - dad's got all the answers. - anncr: prevagen is now the number-one-selling brain health supplement in drug stores nationwide. - she outsmarts me every single time. - checkmate! you wanna play again? - anncr: prevagen. healthier brain. better life.

joining us now, senior white house correspondent for "time" magazine brian bennett. good morning. you're here with this week's cover story the crisis you say of the president's own making. tell us what you say inside. >> well, this image itself is very striking and we wanted to

bring attention to this week's events and the summit. and, in particular, we wanted to bring attention to how striking it was that president trump was willing to align himself with president putin of russia on so many issues. whether it was the way forward in syria, anti-nato rhetoric, all of this, all of these objective priorities. president trump was willing to stand next to president putin and align with russian intere interests. one of the most incredible moments is when president trump was asked point blank by a reporter, who do you believe? u.s. intelligence assessments that russia meddled in the 2016 elections or president putin's denials? >> you say here that trump's defenders are just trying to say that the president is really driven here by a defensive reflex to defend the legitimacy of his 2016 election victory. i think we can all agree this is

not helping with the legitimacy. what are some of the other options we need to with a level head start to consider here to explain the president's motivations for this behavior? >> so, i think you're right. there is no satisfactory explanation for why the president has taken putin and russia's side on so many critical issues when it comes to u.s. interest overseas. and i think the big question is, why. and when it comes to president trump, certainly, we know from people close to him that his ego plays a huge, huge role in that. he is obsessed with the legitimacy of the 2016 and that clouded his judgment when it comes to all his other issues. when it comes to next steps, members of congress are extremely concerned that president trump is not taking the interest of the country first and taking his personal interest or some other interest first and that is something the founder designed the presidency and specifically designed the

oath of the presidency to address. >> sam stein here. i only worked for digital publications, i never worked for a print magazine like yours. this week made me very happy for working at digital publications because two potentially even three walk backs of comments that were made by the president. i'm wondering as someone was putting together a publication, as you see trump say something and then say i didn't mean would i meant wouldn't and his press secretary said he didn't mean no, he basically meant yes. how do you handle that as someone who handles a print publication? how do you adjust your coverage around them? >> when you look at the totality of what trump said standing next to putin on monday that moment where he had the opportunity to confront president putin, tell him not to meddle in the 2016 to his face and he didn't take that opportunity. even if there are these iterations of walk backs which, by the way, trump did leaving it

open to other people and the possibility that other people may have hacked the 2016 election, it's entirely possible to paint a comprehensive picture that president trump is still not convinced that the intelligence or doesn't want to back up the intelligence that russia meddled in the 2016 elections and that he is continuing to try to undermine those conclusions. >> by the way, sam's long and winding question was just a humble brag reminding us how young and hip he is. i only worked for digital, man. >> what is print? >> get that print on your fingers. the new issue of "time" summit crisis. no comment, john? >> i'm speechless. president trump seemed to suggest earlier this week that montenegro could cause world war three. now members of trump's own administration are weighing in and they're not on the same page. that's coming up on "morning joe."

until her laptop crashed her salonthis morning.or weeks, you never know what the day's going to bring when you're running a small business, it might even bring a blue screen of death. having it problems? ask a business advisor how to get virus and spyware removal, and 24/7 tech support. office depot now offers on demand tech support for as little as $15 a month. ♪ right now, buy one hp ink and get a second at 30% off at office depot officemax

welcome to holiday inn! thank you! ♪ ♪ wait, i have something for you! every stay is a special stay at holiday inn. save up to 15% when you book early at hollidayinn.com save up to 15% if you have moderate to severely plaque psoriasis, little things can be a big deal. that's why there's otezla. otezla is not an injection or a cream. it's a pill that treats 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 use if you're allergic to otezla. otezla may cause severe diarrhea, nausea, or vomiting.

tell your doctor if these occur. otezla is associated with an increased 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. other side effects include upper respiratory tract infection and headache. tell your doctor about all the medicines you take and if you're pregnant or planning to be. ♪ otezla. show more of you.

>> membership and nato obligates any other member that was attacked. why should my son go to momonts >> congratulations. you're in world war iii. i understand that is the way it was set up. don't forget, i got here a little more than a year and a half ago and i took over the conversation and i said, you have to pay, you have to pay. the secretary-general said because of president trump last year we had an additional $44 billion, with a b, billion dollars raised for nato and this

year more than that. the country all agreed, it was very unfair. not only are we paying for most of it, but they're not even paying and we're protecting them. add that to your little equation of montenegro. >> that was president trump speaking earlier this week. senator john mccain chastised the president for those remarks saying putin would do anything to shatter the transatlantic alliance and questioning our obligations under nato, playing right into putin's hands. mike pence speaking in mo montenegro praised. >> i bring greetings from president trump who sent me here as a visible sign of the alliance that we now enjoy through nato and the great respect he has for the people of montenegro as our newest nato ally. nato is made up of large

countries and small countries, but the united states of america has no small allies. and we cherish our new allianca. >> little aggressive, but still great people. later added america first does not mean america alone. montenegro defied an angered russia by joining nato barely a year ago under the trump administration. according to the vice president, russian officials were so incensed by their decision to join nato that they tried to block the country from joining the alliance. russia denies that accusation. asked about president trump's comments on montenegro the u.s. maintains iron clad commitment to mutual defense under nato. this isn't just about montenegro but nato and why it's important. >> a legit debate to be had

whether we should be welcoming a country like montenegro into nato. good for them, they are part of the aliance. they have 20 troops in afghanistan and they are fulfilling part of the obligation and a debate on expansion. that said, the president cannot lead the debate on any way, shape or form. the whole purpose of an alliance is to know that the other countries have your back. by casting doubt on that, donald trump weakens, you know, this, you know, this alliance. >> also, you know, the president clearly does not understand. i think tucker carlson did. this is a defensive alliance. so, we are obligated, as are all nato members to come to montenegro's defense if it is attacked. we are not obligated to assist montenegro in some sort of, if they declare war on china or something like that.

it doesn't work that way. but, of course, president trump does. >> the president said he got here a year and a half ago. did he get here a year and a half aknow on earth. did he miss this relationship and what nato is for? it is a huge advantage and defeat for russia. absolutely. so, why do we go? why would we defend montenegro? because it doesn't stop with montenegro. 620,000 people, that is roughly the size of baltimore, they're pretty aggressive, too. but they're not going to start a war with russia. >> why we're seeing the europeans now like angela merkel say that maybe we need to move ahead with our own security arrangements within europe, especially given the message that this is sending now to these baltic countries that border russia that are very nervous right now. >> i would like to go back to something that tucker carlson said that is really annoying. he's talking about montenegro

here and honing in on this one specific country. well, what about the fact that the day two of the nato summit was supposed to focus on afghanistan and donald trump upended the entire agenda and no one talks about america's longest war where two american troops died last week. so, the real work of nato that is supposed to be happening at the summit doesn't happen because donald trump is more concerned with reality tv. >> i was just looking at an article from february of this year where montenegro increase the number of troops in afghanistan by 50% to meet united states demand. they are standing in harm's way. >> they are aggressive. >> all right. >> in a good way. >> all nato allies have come to our assistance. >> article five, as we should remind our viewers, only once and that was after september 11th. turning now to president

trump's supreme court nominee. in 2016 brett kavanaugh made this admission about a case he would like to see overturned. >> can you think of a case that deserves to be overturned? >> yes. >> would you volunteer one? >> no. >> pending confirmation hearings, yes, sir, right here. >> thank you very much. >> actually, i was going to say one. >> they said that's the independent counsel statute case. >> it has been efebtifectively overruled, but i would put the final nail in. >> considering everything we know about judge kavanaugh's expansive view of executive power and accountability, the fact of all the cases in all the history of the supreme court is the first case he could think of

overturning is deeply, deeply troubling. we already know he believes the president shouldn't be investigated while in office. that the president can't be indicted while in office. that a president doesn't have to follow laws that the president deems, his words, unconstitutional. clearly, judge kavanaugh's judicial philosophy incorporates executive power and accountability animated by a belief that our chief executive gets to play by a different set of rules. judge kavanaugh particularly after this interview, needs to recuse himself from anything having to do with the mueller probe. >> so, matt miller clearly chuck schumer and democrats think they're on to something here. in the simplest of terms, can you explain morrison v.olson and the distinction between the

independent counsel and the special counsel which robert mueller is. >> decided the constitutionality of the old law that doesn't exist any more that allowed independent counsels to be appointed and then proceed mostly without supervision of the justice department. ken starr for example was an independent counsel. it's been controversial on the right. anthony scalia wrote a dissent. i'm not surprised that brett kavanaugh disagreed with the opinion. i'm surprised he would come out and say it. one of the things i think that is important here looking for his confirmation hearings, conservative jurists, potential supreme court justices even in this administration have figured out the way to get on the bench is to avoid discussing what are some very unpopular views held in the republican party, that money should be allowed to flow unfettered into politics, women shouldn't have the right to choose.

what i think kavanaugh did is he's opened the door where he has to discuss his views on morrison v olson in his confirmation hearings and whether he thinks not just independent counsels, but special counsels like bob mueller are unconstitutional as paul manafort has said, as donald trump has said. he has to talk about his views about whether a president should be investigated, not just whether a president can be indicted but whether it's appropriate a president is investigated while in office. he's come out as a policy position he doesn't think he is. and the fact he was willing to weigh in on this case, one supreme court case ought to be overturned it's fair to ask him not to hide his views on roe v. wade and other big cases, but whether to answer whether he thinks those were also correctly decided. >> that was my main takeaway. if you watched the video you get the sense maybe he's doing this tongue in cheek. he was part of the starr

investigation. maybe he has lingering history. in the end, what he has done effectively is commented on a legal matter that he can now -- i don't think he can go before the senate and say i can't comment on that. he's done that. as a political matter, democrats on the hill are very much intent on hemming home the possibility that roe v. wade will be overturned. i don't think the needle has moved that much by the debate of constitutionality of special counsel. i do think the most important thing, which you'll see repeated in these confirmation hearings and on the hill, will you recuse yourself from this matter. there's precedent for nominees on the supreme court to recuse themselves from cases that do involve the president who nominated them. >> the most important thing that schumer didn't say was it's

deeply disturbing he's going to come out against roe v. wade. >> schumer mentioned roe v. wade briefly. >> we're talking about a law that doesn't exist any more. we're talking about an opinion, a case, a law -- the law done exist. robert mueller is not under the independent counsel law which done exist any more. and the other thing, why get so far ahead. it's a big campaign to defeat the nominee. why doesn't schumer wait until his response is. it's a legitimate question. it's a legitimate question whether the president should be indicted or investigated. he doesn't think they should be. let's find out his reasons about that. to pre-judge it going in gets old. >> matt miller you covered a lot of ground for us. thank you. up next, hallie jackson was part of the press corps on what the president believes about

russian meddling. plus we'll talk to former u.s. ambassador to russia michael mcfall at the center of a tug-of-war. and dick durbin within join us andon joniernst when we come bac back.

with two times more geographic detail... ...ancestrydna can pinpoint where your ancestors are from... ...and the paths they took, to a new home. could their journey inspire yours? order your kit at ancestrydna.com. man: it takes a lot of work to run this business, but i really love it. i'm on the move all day long,

and sometimes i don't eat the way i should. so i drink boost to get the nutrition i'm missing. boost high protein now has 33% more protein, along with 26 essential vitamins and minerals. and it has a guaranteed great taste. man: boost gives me everything i need to be up for doing what i love. boost high protein. be up for it.

joe" on a beautiful thursday morning at the white house. it's thursday, june 19th, 2018. joe and mika have the morning off. i'm willie geist. we have our politics editor for the "daily beast". republican communications strategist and msnbc political contributor rick tyler. former aide to the george h. w. bush white house. and associate editor of the "the washington post" and msnbc political analyst, eugene robinson. we'll start this hour with the moment from the white house yesterday where president trump seemed to say something pretty definitive on through have the white house walk it back a short time later. >> is russia still targeting the u.s., mr. president? >> thank you very much. no. >> let's go, we're finished here. press, let's go. >> thank you very much,

everybody. we're doing very well. we're doing very well. we're doing very well, probably as well as anybody has ever done with russia. >> you didn't pick that up the president was asked is russia still targeting the u.s., he replied no. joining us now is hallie jackson. good morning. i want to play for our viewers your exchange yesterday with sarah huckabee sanders in the white house briefing room as the white house tried to explain exactly what the president said in that statement and exactly where he stands with regard to russia's interference in the election. let's listen. >> i want to just clarify something. so despite the video that shows the president looking and answering no to this question about whether russia is still targeting the u.s. and despite multiple people in the room understanding the president was responding to that question and despite the president never before having said no, no before ushering reporters out of the room you said that's reverse. >> first thing the president

said after the question was asked was thank you very much. he said no, i'm not answering any more questions. even further, i think even she didn't realize what the answer was and she asked for a clarification and he didn't answer the follow up. she wasn't sure, i talked to the president. he wasn't answering that question. he was saying no. he's not taking questions. and i've stated what our position is. >> the president, the second time in three days that the president or white house has come out and reversed what the president has said. >> actually, i'm interpreting what the president said not reversing it. i didn't take at any time way you did. >> but why should this president have any credibility to americans in what he says if, in fact, 24 hours later or in this case three hours later the white house comes out and says just kidding. >> first of all, that's not what i said. i interpreted what the president's intention was.

it's not what you just explained. we never said just kidding. you can take the fact the president has credibility because he saw he had misspoken and wanted to clarify that yesterday, which de. so when he sees he's misspoken he comes out and says that. jordan -- >> just a follow up on my second question. >> you've asked two. >> you told josh -- >> once again i'm moving on to jordan. jordan, go ahead. >> sorry, go ahead. >> thanks. >> i'm going to take a question from jordan. >> i don't think any of us, at least i don't remember a time when a president has publicly called out put. >> the president said that russia interfered with our election is a pretty bold call out of another world leader. jordan, go ahead. >> nice job by jordan fabian of the hill bouncing the question back to hallie jackson. how did you leave the briefing

room yesterday on the president's view of the question. >> the message is mixed up here and muddled because despite sarah huckabee sanders saying she interpreted -- listen she's the spokesperson for the president of the united states. she said she spoke with him and was not, in fact answering this question no, he was saying no, get out of the room time to leave. i pointed out that's strange something the president has never done before in my recollection of countless times of shouting questions to the president. that's not what he does. it seemed like a valid question to put to sarah huckabee sanders, really? is that really your reasoning here? the president was not looking at cecelia and saying no to her question. even if the president -- let's give sarah huckabee sanders the benefit of the doubt here. maybe the president was saying no i'm not answering any more questions for the first time in

my year and a half of covering this president. yesterday was the day he decided to do that. even if that were the case, the messaging is confusing from this president and that's the second time in three days that something happened that seemed to be the exact opposite of what the white house later said it actually was. that goes to tissue is how is this president's words, how is what he says perceived by americans in this country and by people around the world if, in fact, there's a possibility the white house could clarify a day later or a few hours later after the fallout has come up, willie. it seems like this is happening at least this week on one issue and that issue is russian interference. this is not a question the president has had fewer times had to clarify issues on, for example, the economy or trade or other issues related to foreign policy. it seems like it's often this particular topic when it comes to vladimir putin. on that last bit you gave that

shout out to jordan fabian. he let us ask a follow up. sanders said to another colleague from "the washington post" the president has called out put publicly. i don't remember a time when the president has done that. it seemed like that was another important question to follow up on, sanders indicating the president speaking generally about election interference was the call out. >> the president did the opposite when given an opportunity by jonathan standing at that podium in helsinki. another chapter to this story. after the president left that cabinet room he sat down for an interview with jeff glor of cbs news. >> you say you agree with u.s. intelligence that russia meddled in the election of 2016. >> i said that numerous times before. i would say that that is true, yeah. >> but you haven't condemned putin specifically. do you hold him personally responsible? >> well, i would because he's in

charge of the country, just like i consider myself to be responsible for things that happen in this country. so, certainly as the leader of a country you would have to hold him responsible, yes. >> what did you say to him? >> very strong on the fact we can't have any meddling. we live in a grown-up world. a strong statement to president obama supposedly made a strong statement. >> he denies it. if you believe u.s. intelligence agencies is putin lying to you >> i don't want to get into whether or not he's lying. i do have confidence in our intelligence agencies as currently constituted. >> so even as you and i have been talking the president tweeted the fake news media want so badly to see a major confrontation with russia, even a confrontation that could lead to war. he made that point yesterday in another tweet. no one suggested there should be a war. that's a talking point he got from "fox & friends" when a

contributor made it. the fake news pushing so recklessly hard and i hate the fact i'll have a good relationship with putin. we're doing much better than any other country. wean that explanation to jeff glor where he likes to remind people and he suggested he stood up to vladimir putin and he agrees there was interference in the 2016 election the president remains annoyed by the conversation. >> he's annoyed by the coverage and so are fellow staffers at the white house. people have this sense that the media is out the get them by talking about the news conference with vladimir putin and what did and did not come out of those conversations. thank you for reading the president's tweet. i would say this, the president really does talk frequently about the idea of resetting the u.s. relationship with russia. there's a sense that he thinks he could actually get something done with vladimir putin on other issues not related to election interference. this is where he's come back to

again and again. it's what you hear when you talk to white house sources behind-the-scenes why the president doesn't continue to condemn vladimir putin. it's because there's a sense that perhaps he can repair what he views as a relationship that has been ruined by past presidents. again, there are critics of the president who say the reason the relationship is so bad is because put's russia attacked our democracy and tried to undermine our election, which is a reason to have a bad relationship and to come out and speak strongly against putin. to the president, those it's the former argument that holds more weight the reset argument versus the latter. >> thanks for taking some time with us. let's bring in a member of the foreign relations committee, chris murphy of connecticut. senator, good to see you. so many places we can go. let me start with what we talked about a few minutes ago, this idea that the white house again said it was entertaining

yesterday inside the white house briefing room of perhaps making former ambassador michael mcfaul the united states ambassador to russia available. perhaps allowing russian officials to interview in some kind of a show investigation, show trial. what do you make of that idea? >> it's ridiculous. it's another sign that this president is very happy making himself a client of vladimir putin, who knows what they talked about behind closed doors. the idea that the united states would give up a u.s. ambassador to the russians for questioning simple pli because the russians are uncomfortable with the fact that mike mcfaul raised electronically issues of human rights and civil libts while in moscow is so dangerous because effectively it sends a chilling message over tory other diplomat who is representing the united states all around the world if you take on a dictator or a despot strongly the u.s. may give you up. we have indicted a number of

russians for interference in elections here. but no president should be talking about a trade, giving away a u.s. ambassador. i don't think it's a coincidence that mike mcfaul has been a critic of this president, frequently been on television bringing it to donald trump for his weakness in the face of the russian threat. >> i have some reporting today out that there's significant frustration on the senate foreign relations committee that this is now the second deals with dictators deal that the president has done following his summit with kim jong-un where members of congress simply have not been briefed. i know you had wanted mike pompeo to come up after that summit. that got cancelled. it's never happened. he's finally scheduled to appear before the committee on wednesday. what do you absolutely need to know from him, given that while he wasn't part of the one-on-one, he was part of a follow up meeting with vladimir putin.

>> i think the danger is that mike pompeo done know what we need to know. we need to know what happened in that one-on-one meeting with vladimir putin and donald trump and i think there's a chance that things were talked about in that meeting that were not disclosed to mike pompeo. it is inexcusable that the state department hasn't come to congress since the north korea summit to brief us on the substance of those negotiations which were also done in private so we'll have a lot to cover. but, you know, both of these meetings have gone incredibly badly. we made ourselves weaker in the world because of the embarrassing behavior of trump in helsinki. also we need to ask secretary of state questions about what happened in the meeting with north korea since that meeting the north koreans have restarted their nuclear program. we cancelled our military activities on the peninsula. i want seems as if kim has gotten everything he wanted and the united states has gotten nothing. we have a lot of work to do in that meeting next week.

>> senator, gene robinson here. given what's happening with north korea, russia, that incredible press conference with putin and trump on monday, the back and forth, do you now believe you have reason to question the president's loyalty? >> i think we have to wait for the mueller investigation. obviously, it is hard to explain the totality of the president's trip. we're so focused on the performance in helsinki we've forgotten about his performance with our european allies when he essentially went to nato to blow up the alliance. he did a good job of rendering that alliance temporarily obsolete. there's no explanation for that because it puts america at risk. while i don't think i'm ready to put labels on it i'm more concerned than ever before and i'm hopeful that republicans who feel like they need to do something in the face of this

unprecedented behavior might find that something in legislation to protect mueller from interference by the administration. >> senator, sam stein here. two quick questions. how sisters is the idea of bringing in the translator, the one person who actually was in the room with putin and trump to debrief maybe in a classified setting or nonpublic setting about what was said? >> i don't know what the feasibility of that is. my colleagues have asked for that. i imagine that there would be a pretty strong claim of executive privilege if we were to insist on that briefing happening. but i think we got look at extraordinary measures to understand what happened in that room. if vladimir putin, indeed, does have compromising information over this president, that would be the place in which it would be raised and it seems that given that extraordinary possibility, we should think about extraordinary measures to try to get to the truth. >> the other thing is the one sort of legislative response that seems to be cooking in the

senate here, is an act called the deter act which if i'm summarizing it correctly would basically say, trump won have the ability to waive or imply sanctions on russia but when the dni, the director of national intelligence determines election immediate scientology happening he or she then would institute or implement the sanctions. is that an effective way of getting the president out of the equation and what's your sense of whether that has the type of support in the senate to get a veto proof majority which it would ultimately need to get past the president. >> it's sad we're talking about the legislation that would vest sanctions authority in someone other than the president. you know, that's not something congress should have to consider. again, i think we're left with very few options here. but, sam, i've gotten to the point i feel like, you know, democrats are kind of charlie brown to republicans lucy on russia. they occasionally send out sort of milqtoast criticism over

social media over the president, say a few things in the hallways here. i think they made it clear they won't be -- republicans are not going to be a national security check on this president. we're basically going to have to take this question to the electorate this november and tell them if you want a congress that will stand up for our national security than the president's political interest you need to vote for democrats. that's where we are. >> senator, how much weaker do you think the american commitment to nato is in the aftermath of last week's summit? >> so, i think we really need to be talking about how catastrophic that summit is. article v is a political commitment. if russia would ever attack nato or latvia or estonia, it wouldn't be with russian military some kind of a hybrid attack, something the kremlin

could deny. what the president told the world if there's an attack on a foreign country and russia denies it, the president of the united states is going to believe russia. not going to believe his own intelligence or national security services. i don't think it's credible today that the united states is going to come to europe's defense if there's an take. what i really worry about is europe knows that. so europe is going to be less willing to come to the defense of the united states as well. if that's the case, then all of our assumptions about how we defend our country fall apart. the nato commitment is a political commitment and i think it fell apart last week. >> senator, in cbs news interview the president continues to qualify, calling putin out. saying i would hold him responsible as if nobody presented any evidence in holding him responsible. i'm not saying he should stand next to putin and call him a

liar but how important is it that president acknowledge that putin orchestrated these attacks on our election. >> there's no way you had these high level russian operatives involved without putin knowing about it. more to the case even after they were caught in 2016, they continued to do it and doing it to this day. remember, you know, the russians are constantly trying to manipulate our political debate, schumer shut down a year ago, trending on twitter because of russian trolls who were pushing out that message. it's important for him to call out putin directly because there's no doubt that putin is currently directing the manipulation of american politics. so, again, in helsinki he didn't need to turn to putin, point a finger, wag a finger at him our expectations are low for what the president needed to do and he didn't even pass that very basic bar of acknowledging the

interference of mentioning ukraine and crimea. i don't think he's going to do the big dramatic gesture but he's got to be much stronger than he's been. >> and thank you. still ahead. chris murphy just said republicans are not acting as a national security check to president trump. we'll give one of those republican senators the opportunity to respond. iowa republican joni ernst joins our conversation next. your insurance rates skyrocket after

a scratch so small you could fix it with a pen. how about using that pen to sign up for new insurance instead? for drivers with accident forgiveness, liberty mutual won't raise their rates because of their first accident. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ it's a high-tech revolution in sleep. the new sleep number 360 smart bed. it intelligently senses your movement and automatically adjusts on each side to keep you both comfortable. and snoring? how smart is that? smarter sleep. to help you lose your dad bod, train for that marathon, and wake up with the patience of a saint. the new sleep number 360 smart bed, from $999. smarter sleep will change your life. with my bladder leakage, the products i've tried just didn't fit right. they were very saggy. it's getting in the way of our camping trips.

but with new sizes, depend fit-flex is made for me. introducing more sizes for better comfort. new depend fit-flex underwear is guaranteed to be your best fit. let's do an ad of a man eating free waffles at comfort inn. they taste like victory because he always gets the lowest price on our rooms, guaranteed, when he books direct at choicehotels.com. or just say badda book, badda boom. book now at choicehotels.com. or just say badda book, badda boom.

introducing e*trade personalized investments professionally managed portfolios customized to help meet your financial goals. you'll know what you're invested in and how it's performing. so you can spend more time floating about on your inflatable swan. [ding] until her laptop crashed this morning. her salon was booked for weeks, having it problems? ask a business advisor how to get on demand tech support for as little as $15 a month. right now, buy one hp ink and get a second at 30% off at office depot officemax

senator joni ernst said she hopes president trump delivered a strong message to vladimir putin behind closed doors. should the senate find out exactly what was said faip

republic -- behind closed doors. you've been very clear in your feelings towards russia. you say obviously russia is not our friend. russia has never been a friend the u.s. they continue to pose a threat to america and our allies. you've been very clear in your support for the intelligence service. i have the utmost faith in the u.s. intelligence community and their assessment that russia interfered in the 2016 election process. are you satisfied with the president's explanation of his feelings about the russian interference in the 2016 election? >> the president should have been much clearer. as i have stated time and again you read some of my quotes, russia is not our friend and any time we approach russia or thoughts of russia we should always operate under the assumption they want to undermine the united states of america. >> so given your feelings, senator, about russia, how did you feel on monday when you watched the president stand at that lectern next to the president of russia in helsinki and pass on an opportunity to

confront him or at least to condemn russia and make clear the way he felt? >> i was disappointed, willie. this was a tremendous opportunity for america to go forward and show strength against russia, and that didn't happen. again, the president should have been much, much clearer. there are so many russian aggressions that we could have brought up in that opportunity. we should have pushed back very heavily, going all the way back to crimea, the invasion of crimea by russia, their gray zone opportunities involving many of our balkan friends, especially our sister state to iowa, kosovo. there's so many activities out there. we lost an opportunity to bring those up. >> hi, senator. thanks so much for joining. you said you hoped that the president in private delivered a stronger message, but what we know about the president's meeting in the oval office with russians a day after firing comey is he did let slip some classified information about

israel. so do you hope that the president did that or do you demand an answer about whether he did that and how do you get that answer since no one else was in that room? how far are you prepared to go in terms of demanding an answer. >> i do think that you bring up a great point, that no one else was in the room other than the translator. we know that to be true. but, the president should not go into those meetings without someone that's able to record the message, take down those notes. we don't know what followup actions, if any, are out there. we don't know what the president's demands are. we don't know what president putin's demands are. so, i always would encourage the president to make sure that he has someone who has got his back, that is taking care, writing down those requests, those demands. that way we do know. >> senator, gene robinson here. would you then support an effort

to get the translator to testify before congress, perhaps, in a classified setting, but to explain to congress what was said in that meeting? >> i would state that if the translator is to be questioned that it should be our intelligent agencies that are doing that questioning. again, knowing the context of the conversations. i think that would be the appropriate place to start, to make a show of it at congress, i don't know that that would help the situation any. but certainly if we need answers, it needs to be done through the intelligence community. >> senator, good morning, rick tyler. congress is a part of the executive branch. foreign policy resides in the executive branch but americans are worried we're projecting weakness overseas with these two meeting, one with kim jong-un and the other with vladimir putin, the two district taters. what leverage does the congress have? what are you prepared to do to

reassure americans if this foreign policy continues to go in what is seemingly to many a disastrous decision? >> i'm going to push back because i think the meeting with the north korean leader was extremely important. we have to have dialogue, we have to have communication to move us forward if we ever expect to denuclearize the correspondent peninsula. so i actually do think that that is a step in the right direction. i think that a step in the right direction could be have had with president putin if hit been done in a more transparent type of situation. if we had gone forward, if the president had gone in from a position of strength. i think that was a lost opportunity. but i think it is important that we have dialogue with some of these world leaders and we make it very clear what our demands are as the united states of america. i appreciate the dialogue, but, again, i wish that we had seen

different communications coming from the president, especially as it applies to russia. >> senator, it's sam stein here. your colleague chris murphy had tough words for republicans in the chamber said they abdicated their ability to serve as national security check on the president. what i've heard from you has been, condemnation of the president's comments but no actual tangible moves to provide some sort of semblance of checks or balance on some of the things that happened in helsinki. for instance, you say you don't think it's your committee's purview to bring in the translator. would you support legislation that has further sanctions on russia and take it out of the president's hands. are you in favor of bringing members before your committee to get answers. i would like to see anything tangible that you would support that provide some sort of oversight on this president. >> i do think it is up to the

president, no matter what party, to work with foreign leaders. i think that's very important. but what we have seen so far has actually been a solid track record from republicans leading in the united states senate. i spearheaded an effort that provided lethal aid to you crth ukraine. we have sanctions on russia. we have the european reassurance initiatives which push back eastern europe against russia gray zone activities which are activities that are short of war. so i think you have seen great leadership coming from senate republicans. things that were pushed back on in the previous administration. so when it comes to getting tough with russia, it has been this congress that has led the way. i would look at so many

situations around the globe where we have had briefings, all senators briefings down in our skiff at the capital and i lost count how many briefings we've had regarding different situations around the globe. you know how many times i attended an all senators briefing on world situations under the obama administration? zero. >> senator, switching gears slightly to another foreign policy issue that hits near and dear with about half a million of your constituents, the tariffs that donald trump is proposing. what are you hearing from your constituents in iowa farmland about how these tariffs are going to affect their lives and livelihoods and what are you proposing that congress do check the president's power over what seems to be a fairly ad hoc trade policy. >> well, we continue to have discussions, and you're right. i'm hearing from iowans every

single day. i spoke with some corn growers yesterday. our soybean folks were in last week. our pork producers sent messages. we communicate with them as well. they have been hit very hard. these tariffs have had a very detrimental effect on their family farm income. and we need to see trade resolved soon. i support the president and the fact that he wants better trade deals. i think that should be the goal of the united states of america, but certainly we have to close some of these deals. to bring optimism into our markets. our markets are bottoming out. and i spoke to a young couple from iowa yesterday, they were out with a large group concerned about trade and tariffs, and the drop in prices in this past year with their corn and soybeans amounted to about $80,000. that's $80,000 loss of income should they sell today. so, we have to face that reality

that our farm economy is going to be hit very, very hard if we don't seal up the deal with mexico, seal the deal with canada, start finding new trade opportunities. i know that our trade rep is working daily gently on these issues. but farmers are caught in the cross-hairs. >> in addition to these questions about trade and foreign policy you're working hard on the issue of paid family leave. in the senate you and marco rubio co-sponsored some legislation there and you have allies, democrats, who say good for joni ernst, good for marco rubio, we taught have paid family leave in this country. the disagreement is how to pay for it. you believe that money should come from the social securitys is trust fund kpp you explain how it would work from your perspective? >> certainly. one of the ideas we have discussed is because we're tracked as individual workers, we know what our retirement income from social security will be, and what a mother or father could do upon the birth of a

child or the adoption of a child is apply for those benefits through social security disability. that which they do receive a paycheck while they are taking time off at work. and the way that would work is then they would defer their retirement for a number of weeks, depending on how many week of leave they would take off, they would then, whatever the equation would be, we haven't decided on that yet, but they would defer those weeks off at the end of their retirement. so their retirement age would bump back a little bit. we do think it's important. we want our moms and dads to be able to spend time, great quality, bonding time with their children. we know that there are a number of studies that say the more time a parent can spend with their child at their birth, then they better will perform as children. >> i think senator brown and demonstrate colleagues like the idea but believe dipping into

social security is not a good idea. why play with the retirement fund. why shouldn't this be on the employer, for example? >> well, again, additional tax on the employer, and we don't have any cbo scores back own their proposal because that would be an impact. we want to see that everybody knows what their retirement benefits will be. we don't want to see additional taxes placed on the employer or the employee. we want to make sure that they have a positive way forward, and know that, okay, this is my retirement. i can defer it for a number of weeks. we feel that's the way to go. >> only six states in this country that required paid family leave. thank you for your time this morning. coming up, the offer the president called incredible. putin's proposal to give robert mueller access to russian's

indicted for hacking democrats in 2016 if the united states allows russia to introer investigate americans sought by the kremlin and we'll talk to one of those americans. the white house yesterday would not rule out handing over. ambassador mcfaul joins us next on "morning joe".

i have to tell you something incredible. capital one has partnered with hotels.com to give venture cardholders 10 miles on every dollar they spend at thousands of hotels. all you have to do is pay with this at hotels.com/venture. 10 miles per dollar? that is incredible. brrrrr! i have the chills. because you're so excited? because ice... is cold. and because of all those miles. obviously. what's in your wallet? obviously. only tylenol® rapid release gels have laser drilled holes. they release medicine fast, for fast pain relief. tylenol® until her laptop crashed this morning. her salon was booked for weeks, having it problems? ask a business advisor how to get on demand tech support for as little as $15 a month.

right now, buy one hp ink and get a second at 30% off at office depot officemax this is not a screensaver.game. this is the destruction of a cancer cell by the body's own immune system, thanks to medicine that didn't exist until now. and today can save your life. ♪ ♪ when did you see the sign? when i needed to jumpstart sales. build attendance for an event. help people find their way. fastsigns designed new directional signage. and got them back on track. get started at fastsigns.com.

question officials including me. officers of law enforcement and intelligence service of the united states whom we believe have something to do with illegal actions in the territory of russia. >> what he did is an incredible offer. he offered people work tongue case come to work with their investigators with respect to the 12 people. i think that's an incredible authority. >> yesterday russia named several americans they claim, including ambassador mcfaul.

is president trump open to that in >> the president will meet with his team and we'll let you know when we have an announcement on that. >> is that a topic that came up in their conversation, has president putin raised this with this president trump? >> there was some conversation about it but there wasn't a commitment made on behalf of the united states and the president will work with his team. >> that was the white house briefing room yesterday. joining us now, professor of political science and director of the institute for international studies at stanford university, former ambassador mcfaul. thank you for being with us. just as a human being what was it like for you to watch the president call that offer, given that you were a part of that offer an incredible one, and then to see the white house yesterday say, yeah, we're talking about it, we're discussing it, we haven't made any commitment. >> well, i was in helsinki live working with you guys, by the

way, when they first discussed that. and they didn't mention my name in helsinki but did mention mr. br browder's name. these 11 individuals who they think was involved in the so-called browder scheme of money laundering, these government officials that's what putin said. it came out in the russian press they had a list and i was at the top of that list. shocking. this is classic what aboutism by the russians. you have this indictment. well we have this indictment of these people. tit for tat. then most shocking and just lamentable, i think is my real reaction when the white house was given the opportunity to categorically reject this moral equivalency between a legitimate indictment with lots of data and evidence to support it from mr. mueller, with a crazy,

cockamamey scheme with no relation to facts whatsoever the white house refused to do that. i hope somebody asks him another question today and get the right today. we see that lately. take two, take three to get the message right. this isn't just about me but this is about america national interest. we can't allow this kind of moral equivalency when dealing with vladimir putin. >> we played the white house reaction to that question yesterday. let me show you a different story at the state department yesterday. >> i can answer on behalf of the white house with regard to that but what i can tell you that the overall aserges that have come out of the russian government are absolutely absurd. the fact that they want to question 11 american citizens and the assertions that the russian government is making about those american citizen, we do not stand by those aserges that the russian government makes. >> ambassador, that seemed to be the consensus inside the halls

of congress. senator mike warner said we're not sending ambassador mcfaul to russia. do you think there's any chance this actually happens? >> well, first of all, i want to thank my state department colleagues for that very strong statement. what was unusual about it -- i mean it was fantastic. that's like what a normal statement would be in normal times. the thing that was abnormal was the first phrase. while i can't speak for the white house. i'm sorry. one trump administration. i worked at the white house for three years. that sentence if it ever had come up, both sides would be outraged. the white house would say what do you mean you don't speak for us and vice versa. yet again the trump administration has two policies towards russia, not one. with respect to the future, you know, i now have lawyers and i have to take precautions. i think it's highly unlikely that the u.s. government would ever entertain its called an

emmelot request, a treaty where this can happen with respect to criminal investigations. the state department department of justice would have to approve of it and i would also be able to go to a judge, if that happened -- i think that's a pretty low probability. >> ambassador you're a former ambassador, you're a scholar, you understand russian syops president what do you think president putin tried to get out of president trump and what would they do to you if we did send you over there. what would putin do to you >> it's classic, you know, i've known vladimir putin for a long time. met him first in 1991. i've been in several meetings with him when i was in government. i wrote a whole book about his intimidation and harassment of me as a u.s. ambassador to document for northwestern people

who this guy is and what he does. both abroad and to his own people and diplomats like me. it's unprecedented what he does. with i had meeting with trump, it's classic what aboutism. you know you got your problems, we got our problems, you have your charges, we have our charges against your american government officials. and what i fear, you know, because president trump probably is not as conversant in these issues as he should be or most certainly not as conversant as putin is he probably nod around. okay that sounds like a good idea. oh, you have some trouble with our government officials. you don't need to believe me. he said it to the world. he thinks it was a great idea. and that's just perfect for vladimir putin. with respect to me personally, put doesn't like me. he doesn't like what i've written about him. he doesn't like what i say about him. right now not even when i was in the government. this is an active intimidatation

against me. my government i hope will step up and categorically and swap this back. when i say my government, my president of the u.n. united states, when he just said last night america is no longer under attack. i'm sorry. i'm an american. i'm under attack by vladimir putin right now. i hope he'll stand up. now they will make my life more difficult as i travel abroad with interpol, perhaps. they want to harass me and they want to intimidate mean make me quiet. >> mr. ambassador, congratulations for waking up on american soil. question for you about the chilling effect that this might have on the diplomatic corps. we talked to a few diplomats about this yesterday, and i would safely say that they were aghast by what they heard. >> yes. >> there are diplomats in the field right now people in russia as they look at the potential that the current president may trade in a former diplomat.

what does it mean for the work they do and what kind of effect might it have on our geopolitical relations as they are currently constituted? >> that's a great question. i've heard from a lot of diplomats as well and former diplomats over the last 24 hours. it is chilling. the notion that our president just kind of very casually said oh, yeah let's have our diplomats be interrogated. i want to be clear, to be interrogated because they think we're criminals. put was clear about natural subsequently his law enforcement officials have been very clear about that. and it's scary. you know, diplomats are supposed to have diplomatic immunity. and to now be, you know, have to worry about this, and just -- it's the image of america. we look weak. we look like we won't push back on outrageous crazy ideas. that is not even good for

president trump. i hope if you guys are listening, you look weak in the eyes of vladimir putin. you cannot believe the way the kinds of cartoons that are circulating in the russian press right now. time to push back on president putin and not just when you're sitting at home but standing next to him. if you don't, we'll be dealing with this guy pushing us around the world and harassing our diplomats inside russia for a long, long time. >> ambassador, i don't know if you had a chance to see who some of your fellow travellers are on putin's list of 11. americans that he would like to question. but is there, if you have, is there any common strain that led vladimir putin to deem these americans of interest, and why is it that these specific individuals have angered him? >> so, that's a great question. i don't have a complete answer. i haven't had time to think

about it. some of the names on that list i know well. david cramer a former assistant secretary to the bush administration. he was a vocal supporter of the act that president obama signed in 2012. bill browder was a champion for. that act says the united states has the right to deny travel to people suspected of human rights abuses, including the tragic death of a lawyer hired by bill browder to represent him, he died in pre-trial detention. so people like david who are affiliated with that. a few others. some congressional people. then a couple of others that i think may be affiliated with the steel dossier. >> ambassador, mcfaul, someone who has known putin for almost

30 years and understands the way he think, what does vladimir putin hear when he sees the president of the united states question the nato alliance, he makes those comments he made about montenegro, why should we go out and defend. what does putin hear when the president says those things? >> i think he's as shocked as the rest of us. never in his wildest dreams, when he intervened in 2016 to help candidate trump win that election. did he think that just two years later the president of the united states would be questioning our article v commitments. i can't imagine back in 2016 they ever thought they would be in this place. it's an extremely dangerous thing that the president said. i hope, again, his team around him convince him to walk it back like we had to walk back so many things. it just send as dangerous signal because uncertainty about our

commitment to nato, undermines the whole purpose of nato. it undermines deterrence. you have to have rock solid commitment and unity otherwise the whole idea of nato explaining your side of this. thank you so much. we want to mention the ambassador's new book from cold war to hot peace, an american ambassador in putin's russia, a must read in these times. still ahead, we've heard from two senators this morning. we'll bring in democrat dick durbin, just ahead. summer sales event

and now is the best time to buy. preparing classic campfire trout. say what? trout. trout. all right. you don't think i need both? why does he have that axe? make summer go right with ford america's best selling brand. now get 0% financing for 72 months plus $1,000 ford credit bonus cash on a great selection of suv's. during the ford summer sales event, get our best offer of the season 0% financing for 72 months plus $1,000 ford credit bonus cash. 0% financing for 72 months plus if you have moderate to severe plaque psoriasis, little things can be a big deal. that's why there's otezla. otezla is not an injection or a cream. it's a pill that treats 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 use if you're allergic to otezla. otezla may cause severe diarrhea, nausea, or vomiting. tell your doctor if these occur. otezla is associated with an increased 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. other side effects include upper respiratory tract infection and headache. tell your doctor about all the medicines you take and if you're pregnant or planning to be. ♪ otezla. show more of you.

at&t provides edge-to-edge intelligence, covering virtually every part of your retail business. so that if your customer needs shoes, & he's got wide feet. & with edge-to-edge intelligence you've got near real time inventory updates. & he'll find the same shoes in your store that he found online he'll be one happy, very forgetful wide footed customer. at&t provides edge to edge intelligence. it can do so much for your business, the list goes on and on. that's the power of &. & if your customer also forgets socks! & you could send him a coupon for that item.

streaming must see tv has never been easier. paying for things is a breeze. and getting into new places is even simpler. with xfinity mobile, saving money is effortless too. it's the only network that combines america's largest, most reliable 4g lte with the most wi-fi hotspots. and it can be included with your internet. which could save you hundreds of dollars a year. plus, get $150 dollars when you bring in your own phone. its a new kind of network designed to save you money. click, call or visit a store today. a fascinating conversation there with the ambassador who we have on the show all the time, but in the context of what we

saw from the white house yesterday, he was, i think, as aghast as the rest of us that the white house would not clearly state that they would not hand over american citizens. >> and why wouldn't he be? it's extraordinary that this is even a matter for discussion, that a definitive answer was not given. i think ambassador mcfall was a lot calmer about this than i would be and that a lot of u.s. diplomates have to be today until we get a definitive tough statement from the white house explaining why this is completely beyond the pale. this will never happen in a million years. that's what they should say. >> but in the meantime, simply because it's been raised and not shot down by this white house, you heard from the ambassador himself about the harassment that he is experiencing and that he expects to experience anytime he travels overseas where the russians have ways to intimidate and harass him. >> there are people, you know, in our embassy in moscow right now just wondering. >> and that divide between the

state department comment and the white house comment, who speaks for the u.s. government? >> well, the euphemism is now -- while i can't speak for the white house -- means let me tell you why we disagree with the white house. that's remarkable. i mean, there's supposed to be a unified front. america is supposed to speak as one voice. and trump continually goes out and confuses -- you can imagine a professional com shop saying, mr. president, we need to go clean this up. so go do this other interview. but almost in his head, you almost have to believe that he goes out and muddles it up as a defense because it's easier just to muddle it up rather than to clarify it. >> there are some things you just can't clean up. you can say i didn't mean would, i meant wouldn't. you can say i didn't want to take more questions, but i did. and i just think sometimes, you know, the jeanie is out of the bottle. >> you called it an incredible offer. it's hard to come back from that. this morning, the white house trying to clean up a comment made by president trump. for the second time in as many

days, officials say he does not hold the position he appeared to hold. we'll explain that as a growing number of democrats called for the translator who was in the one-on-one meeting between trump and putin to testify before congress. senator dick durbin of illinois will be our guest. and we'll talk to the author of a new book about the role of white house stenographers. the book just became an instant best seller. she weighs in on how the public can keep checks on a president who does not want to be recorded. "morning joe" is coming back in another three minutes with another packed hour.

until her laptop crashed this morning. her salon was booked for weeks, having it problems? ask a business advisor how to get on demand tech support for as little as $15 a month. right now, buy one hp ink and get a second at 30% off at office depot officemax man: are unpredictable crohn's symptoms following you everywhere? it's time to take back control with stelara®. for adults with moderately to severely active crohn's disease, stelara® works differently. studies showed relief and remission with dosing every 8 weeks. woman: stelara® may lower the ability of your immune system to fight infections and may increase your risk of infections and cancer. some serious infections require hospitalization. before treatment, get tested for tuberculosis. before or during treatment, always tell your doctor if you think you have an infection or have flu-like symptoms or sores, have had cancer, or develop any new skin growths, or if anyone in your house needs or recently had a vaccine. alert your doctor of new or worsening problems, including headaches, seizures, confusion and vision problems.

these may be signs of a rare, potentially fatal brain condition. some serious allergic reactions can occur. do not take stelara® if you are allergic to any of its ingredients. man: are you fed up with crohn's symptoms following you? talk to your doctor today, and learn how janssen can help you explore cost support options. remission can start with stelara®. you always get the lowest price on our rooms, guaranteed? let's say it in a really low voice. carl? lowest price, guaranteed. just stick with badda book. badda boom.

book now at choicehotels.com when the guy in frontd down the highway slams on his brakes out of nowhere. you do, too, but not in time. hey, no big deal. you've got a good record and liberty mutual won't hold a grudge by raising your rates over one mistake. you hear that, karen? liberty mutual doesn't hold grudges... how mature of them. for drivers with accident forgiveness liberty mutual won't raise their rates because of their first accident. liberty mutual insurance. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty ♪ it was always our singular focus. to do whatever it takes, use every possible resource. to fight cancer. and never lose sight of the patients we're fighting for. our cancer treatment specialists share the same vision. experts from all over the world, working closely together to deliver truly personalized cancer care. and these are the specialists we're proud to call our own. expert medicine works here.

learn more at cancercenter.com appointments available now. have you been seen russian activity in the lead up to the election cycle? >> yes. >> director coats. >> yes, we have. >> anyone else? admiral rogers. >> yes. >> and i'm here to say the warning lights are blinking red again. >> is russia still targeting the u.s., mr. president? >> so when the president said he saw no reason why it would be russia who meddled in the election, he really meant wouldn't. and when he said no, russia is not still targeting the u.s., he really believes yes, the kremlin is targeting america. he was just saying no questions. good morning. welcome to "morning joe."

it's thursday, july 19th. joe and mika have the morning off. i'm willie geist alongside heidi, sam stein, republican communications strategist and ms nbc political director rick tyler, former aide to the george w. bush white house lisa jordan, editor of "the washington post" and msnbc political analyst gene robinson and now an msnbc justice and security analyst matt miller. good morning, everybody. >> hey, everybody. heidi, whiplash. >> you just stole my word. >> it may be the word of the day. we're following the president down this trail of yes, they targeted. no, they didn't. the president putin offered strong, powerful denials. i take him at his word. where are we in all of this or are we back where we began had when they say there was intir feerns in the 2016 election and president trump doesn't want to say clearly that it happened?

>> for one of the first times, i had flashback to the beginning of this presidency when on allergy day i was standing on the route for his motorcade and it was raining. we were all in ponchos and the president said the sun is out. the sun was not out. he's asking us to not believe our own eyes when we see him say these things, we see him speak the words. then the white house tells us that that is not what they meant, that is not what happened. so i think they're doing a messy job of cleanup. if the goal is to protect the president's reputation and his integrity and election victory, they're doing the exact opposite. but i will tell you what is happening which is very disturbing which is there was a poll out yesterday that showed that only 35% of republicans believe there was actually russian election meddling. so the confusion and exhaustion that this is creating in the populous is real.

>> and those same republicans believe the investigation into it is a distraction. >> correct. >> let's explain what we're talking about here. the white house tried to move past the fallout of the helsinki summit. but this moment from the president's cabinet meeting yesterday started it all over again. >> is russia still targeting the u.s., mr. president? >> thank you very much. >> make your way out. >> let's go. we're finished here. >> walking back -- >> press, let's go. >> thank you very much, everybody. >> make your way out. >> we're doing very well. we are doing very well. and we're doing very well, probably as well as anybody has ever done with russia. >> i had a chance to speak with the president after his comments. the president said thank you very much. and was saying no to answering questions. >> so he does believe it's going on? >> well, since there's currently not an election today, not specifically. >> so despite the video that shows the president looking at cecelia and answering no to this

question about whether russia is still targeting the u.s. and despite multiple people in the room understanding that the president was respond to go that question and despite the president having never before said the word no, no, repeatedly to usher reporters out of the room, you're saying it's reversed. >> this is the first thing the president said after the question was asked was thank you very much. and then he said no, i'm not answering any more questions. and even further, i think even cecelia didn't realize what the answer was because he asked for clarification and he didn't answer the follow-up. i talked to the president. he wasn't answering that question. he was saying no, he's not taking questions. >> this is the second time in three days that the president or the white house has come out and reversed what the president said. actually, i'm interpreting what the president said. i'm not reversing it. i was in the room, as well, and i didn't take it the way you did. i was interpreting what the president's intention was. >> so the white house's official transcript of the meeting shows the president responding no to

the questions is russia still targeting the u.s. and no to the follow-up question asking for clarification by the reporter who was inside that room. rick tyler, we're playing semantic games here again, but we know where the president stands because he stood up on a stage next to the president of russia and stated pretty clearly where he stands. >> he did in all the context surrounding it and the would to would and not to not and now we're arguing over whether no means yes or yes means no or going on to answer a question the way he did means i'm not taking questions. the president received an intelligence briefing from the previous administration when he came into office. and he convinced himself in that meeting when he was shown that the russians, this is the "new york times" david sanger's story, he was convinced they were trying to convince him the russians interfered in the election and putin was directly responsible for it. he seemed largely convinced. subsequent to that, he convinced himself this was a great

conspiracy and plot to convince him that the election was illegitimate, he didn't win, and the russians interfered in a way. he has so convinced himself of that narrative, he's never been able to let it go. that resulted last week in the disastrous meeting with vladimir putin. >> i think that is a generous explanation. his obsequiousness with putin has predated that briefing. >> there remains two great mysteries, what happens in the meeting and what is on donald trump's tax returns and i think they're related. >> gene robinson, just to go back to the sanger piece, there was a briefing given on january 6th, 2017, inside trump tower that the highest ranking intelligence officials in the united states laying out chapter and verse in clear terms how president putin himself directed

cyber attacks during the election. >> some of it came from a super secret source close to putin that the existence of the source was not even contained in president trump's presidential daily brief. it was restricted to an even tighter circle, just the president and a few other people knew of the sources. donald trump was told in no uncertain terms of the highest ranking intelligence officials, people would know all the secrets that there are to be known that it was putin, that it was him personally who directed this. and, you know, to rick's point, is the president delusional or is the president simply lying? that is not mutually exclusive, but i think he's lying.

>> we're all talking about the aftermath because of the annics, an apostrophe t, would versus wouldn't. all that matters is the image that we all saw of vladimir putin and donald trump on monday. and what tt downtown said, what putin said, and donald trump looking like a fan boy to.an auto accurate. and legislaturery david is one of my favorite comedians, but he would get so amused with himself that he would start laughing sometimes. that was literally putin as donald trump was talking about election meddling. putin can't believe what is happening.

there was a lot of mishging. yesterday, president trump sat down for a second interview with jeff glore of cbs. you say you agree that russia medaling in the election of 2016. >> and i have said that numerous times before. i would say that is true, yeah. >> but you haven't condemned putin specifically. do you hold him personally responsible? >> well, i would because he's in charge of the country. just like i consider myself responsible for things that happen in this country. as the leader of a country, you would have to say yes. >> what did you say to him? >> strong on the fact that we can't have meddling, we can't have any of that. look, we're living in a grownup world. president trump supposedly made a strong statement. nobody heard it. >> but he denies it. so if you believe u.s.

intelligence agencies, is putin lying to you? >> i don't want to get into whether or not he's lying. i can only say that i do have confidence in our intelligence agencies as currently constituted. i think i did great at the news conference. i think it was a strong news conference. i think we did extremely well and i think the press makes up the -- look, it's fake news. and people understand. the level of dishonesty in your profession is extremely high. >> but the press conference the substance and the wording of that press conference -- i don't care what they covered. >> he doesn't care what they covered. by the way, we still don't know what happens in that room for two plus hours. we may never know. although there are senators trying to figure out. dan coats twice in the last six days went out publicly to remind the american people -- he's part of as currently constituted. that the warning signs are blink red about russian interference.

and sglts not just us. there are stories about how the state department simply don't know what kind of verb agreements were struck between donald trump and vladimir putin. that is lalmost frightening. >> it is not almost frightening. it is terribly frightening. >> didn't we just do the same thing with kim jong-un? i'm sorry, but here we are, this is deals with dictators part two. and the only proof you need about how strong the president was in that meeting is the fact that vladimir putin emerged from it seemingly having no

appreciapressure to take responsibler for anything russia did. >> the piece you reference in the times is remarkable, too. i think in some ways, the meta story here is crazy, which is clearly some of the intelligence that the "new york times" got is highly sensitive and the fact that it made its way into print suggests to me that some people in the intel community are willing to reveal some of those methods which normally would not be made on a front page of a major newspaper. matt, as someone who has been in that world and that universe, as you read that piece and you saw some of the methods being described by the times in terms of intelligence gathering, did that strike you as an interesting meta story about what's happening behind the scenes? >> it absolutely did. there were two key pieces of information in that story. one, the fact that the u.s. intelligence committee object stained texts and e-mails of

senior russian officials that made it clear putin was involved. two, more importantly, there was a human source close to vladimir putin who was cooperating with the u.s. intelligence community and providing information that was key to this conclusion that putin directly ordered the intervention in the election. that is the crown jewels of the u.s. election. the fact that that made it out publicly was concern to go me. after i read that had story and found out they helped him cover up that crime by lying about it publicly and he was continuing to help him cover up that crime by standing next to it on monday, it made me wonder what happens in the meeting and i bet it made u.s. intelligence officials wonder what happened in the meeting why the president wanted to have that meeting alone with no one else there, not even his closest advisers.

but it made me wonder if people are suspicious that he revealed sensitive, classified intelligence, including human source information to the president of the russian federation. that's a real concern that i had after reading that story. >> and matt, you're not the first person to raise that suspicion publicly and privately around that table. >> there's some senators talking about trying to bring the interpreter before congress to get a debrief on that. is that reasonable? is that likely? if not, how else do we know what happened? >> it is a dramatic step that on any other occasion would be completely unwarranted. you could make a very good policy case for why the executive needs to have confidential conversations with a foreign leader and that an interpreter shouldn't be subject to oversight. but in this case when the president's actions are under such a cloud and when he's come out and helped vladimir putin cover up a crime -- there's no other way to put it -- i think that interpreter ought to be subject to a subpoena from

congress. you ought to see republicans with that call. a lot of this information would be sensitive and chas phied. but there needs to be some oversight so elected officials know what he promised to president putin and whether he isolated his most sacred oath of office. >> we'll talk more about this next with dick der bin. he joined the conversation straight ahead on "morning joe." not us. because southwest has $69 one-way sale fares for travel throughout september and october. so you can fill the rest of your year with amazing trips. from football games to reunions, or just a break from the office. these $69 one-way sale fares are ready to make your september and october a whole lot better. book now at southwest.com. low fares. no hidden fees. that's transfarency. and now for the rings.

(♪) i'm a four-year-old ring bearer with a bad habit of swallowing stuff. still won't eat my broccoli, though. and if you don't have the right overage, you could be paying for that pricey love band yourself. so get an allstate agent, and be better protected from mayhem. like me. can a ring bearer get a snack around here? you might be missing something.y healthy. your eyes. that's why there's ocuvite. ocuvite helps replenish nutrients your eyes can lose as you age. it has lutein, zeaxanthin and omega-3. ocuvite. be good to your eyes.

until her laptop crashed this morning. her salon was booked for weeks, having it problems? ask a business advisor how to get on demand tech support for as little as $15 a month. right now, buy one hp ink and get a second at 30% off at office depot officemax who would have guessed?

an energy company helping cars emit less. making cars lighter, it's a good place to start, advanced oils for those hard-working parts. fuels that go further so drivers pump less. improving efficiency is what we do best. energy lives here.

welcome back. joining us now from capitol hill, senator dick durbin. always good to see you. >> thanks for having me. >> we just had ambassador on the show and i'll put the question to you, the white house seemed to waiver yesterday when asked in the briefing room whether or not it might make available to slaed mere putin and the russian government americans that putin

would like to speak to and detain. what are your thoughts under that? >> i hope it won't happen, but under this president, it's hard to predict. that's president putin's dream so to call in a professional diplomate and question him about sensitive issues involving the united states. >> so the president standing there passing on the questions regarding president putin. one issue is it's a question of pride, that anything that seems to delegitimize his election or call into question his victory, the other issue is that vladimir putin has something on the

president what has caused him to deas deferential as he's been. >> i think any of those americans understand. first and last, this president wants to make sure there was never a cloud over his victory in the last election. as a democrat on the other side, i can see the obvious. he carried the electoral college. but i also concede and our intelligence agencies and justice department, department of defense back me up, the russians were involved in that election. they were doing everything they could to jeopardize it. the president just can't understand that you can say those two things together. but they're true. and the second part of it, we've called again, as we have over and over again for this president to disclose his tax returns. what is in his next tax return that's is so frightening that he will not, like every other president trumpal candidate, make this basic disclosure? i'm suspecting that it has something to do with russia. >> senator, the white house seems satisfied that they've now clarified the president's position, even though he's saying, hey, it could have been

russia, it could be other people. no clear ree buick of putin. how does this end on capitol hill? and do you have credible information right now about how the russians are trying to do a repeat in 2018 and what that may look like? >> do you know what the united states senate is doing? last week we considered a resolution to reaffirm our commitment to the nato alliance that we've been part of for years. the vote was 97-2. you know what we're doing this week? we're reminding our world of our position against the tyrant vladimir putin. to think that we're wasting of time of these statements of policy is evidence of how this president has shaken up the allies and friends of the united states around the world. in terms of ultimately what is going to happen with this president and the information that he's given the public, he changes his mind every other

day. he restates the obvious every other day and muddles it every time. >> but, senator, what do we know about what they're trying to do in 2018 and when what congress is going to do about it? >> the director of national intelligence, dan coats, former senator from indiana has said clearly twice within the last week that we have a blinking red light. the russians, and perhaps others, are doing everything they can to undermine the election. but because the president and this administration are in complete denial, they're refusing to take the steps necessary to fortify our election system despite this effort by others to make a cyber attack on voters. >> senator, sam stein here. a couple of your colleagues in the democratic party have said that they don't believe the senate should consider brett kavanaugh's nomination for the supreme court until after robert mueller puts out his report on russian interference in the 2016 election, the obvious undertone is that there may be some

illegitimatesy in the election. am i wrong? >> i am concerned about statements made by judge kavanaugh about the role of the president and whether the president should be subject to prosecutions while in office, especially some of the things we've said by a special counsel. we've had a bipartisan debate about the statute. right now, we have a special counsel who was appointed through the duly accepted process under the law and bob mueller is a consummate professional who should be allowed to finish this. my worry and the worry of others is that if we go ahead with kavanaugh to the supreme court, he could short circuit this effort. that would be a tragedy as far as i'm concerned. bob mueller finished his job. >> so you believe there should not be a vote on his confirmation until after the mueller report is released? >> i can tell you we've had various deadlines. i accepted the mitch mcconnell rule when it came to merrick

garden. but, of course, senator mcconnell rejected that. he has the power to bring kavanaugh to the floor for a vote regardless of what the democrats may think. >> i'm sorry, do you think, yes or no, that a vote should happen on kavanaugh's nomination only after mueller's investigation is released? >> you're asking me a question which has too many parts to it. the fundamental part is this. will kavanaugh recuse himself from any questions regarding the supreme court relative to mueller's investigation? he should. >> senator, gene robinson. we hear a lot of rhetoric from republican senators when the president does something like that atrocious appearance with putin on monday. we hear condemnation. we've seen no action. why is that? >> well, i can tell you i've spoke ton a number of these republican senators and they are kind of ringing their hands

saying what more can we say? i think there's a lot more they can say. when they confronted richard nixon, the writing was on the wall. they weren't going to stand for any more lies, corruption or deception. i think that should take place. i wish these republican senators would gather in a group, meet with this president and lay it down on the line in terms of the way he's running this office. >> senator, what is your message to voters and why voters put a majority of democrats in the senate. how would that party use its leverage to check the president's foreign policy? >> i'm not going to duck the question, but let me say i've only seen two election cycles decided by foreign policy. one was the vietnam war and the second was 9/11.

those are the only two. by and large, it's domestic policy and economics that drive election results. in terms of what we can do if the democrats are in the majority in the senate, not to mention the future of the supreme court, but we can stop and certainly affect the foreign policy in this country through the appropriations process. the purse springs are what congress controls and i think we can be a check off some of the terrible abuses of this administration. >> senator durbin, something you said just stuck with me. you said, you know, talking about how the senate has to waste time voting to reaffirm the commitment to nato, etcetera, and it strikes me that we're missing another important story, the texas tribune today is reporting over 70 children who are under the age of 1 have had to show up at immigration court for deportation hearings. what is happening with the administration's reunification policy and what are you doing in congress to push to reunite

children with their parents? >> well, we have a bill that i'm cosponsoring that demands immediate reunification. but don't take my word for it. just read the opinion of the federal judge in san diego that was issued last friday in which he really read the riot act to this administration in what he call aes deception on their part and an effort to cover up the fact that they don't have a process for even identifying and reunifying these children. this judge is losing his temper and he should. this is a shameful chapter in american history that we forcibly separated up to 3,000 children from their parents and literally lost them in the bureaucratic sea. one of the agencies i've worked with said it's like a scavenger hunt to try to team up children with their parents. that, to me, is a complete dereliction of responsibility. >> senator, you had a closed door briefing two days ago maybe from the administration about this separation policy. you had asked for open hearings.

instead, you got a closed door briefing. they gave you this flow chart i guess with the five steps they're taking to reunify families. a lot of people in this country wonder what is going on, how it's happening, why it's not happening any faster. can you shed any new light on that after your briefing? >> it's like the muslim travel ban and it's what the federal judge said in san diego. they does not create a process or an infrastructure to deal with these children. think about it. we're talking about the lives of innocent infants, toddlers and small children that are being tossed into this bureaucratic mess that they have created. and what we learned in this briefing is they're finally coming forward with numbers, but the numbers are frightening. 2,500 kids still not reunited as of two days ago. 1850 parents identified. what about the difference? 700 or so. they're not sure where they are or what happened to them. in some cases, our government deported them from the united states leaving their children behind. now, what's supposed to happen

next? this administration, when it comes to immigration, has been cruel and heartless. it's steven miller at work with this president demanding that we do things that ultimately we're going to be sad and embarrassed about for years to come. >> senator gene robinson again. quickly, should somebody go to jail? is it -- isn't this criminal what the administration has done with these children? >> if this isn't criminal, it should be. when pediatricians of america come forward and say this is institutional child abuse to take these kids away from their parents and confine them to these institutional settings, even the best of these settings create a separation syndrome with the child that can be with them for a lifetime. and this administration did it under zero tolerance announced by this president triumphantly. he wanted to send a message to immigrants around the world and asylum seekers, don't come to this country or we'll take your kids away. that was his message and it wasn't until there was a massive

public reaction against it that he backed off this policy. >> we'll be back with you many times on this issue as you stay on top of it. thanks for your time this morning. >> thanks, willie. our next guest quit her job because in her words, i couldn't be proud of where i worked any more. former white house stenographer beck jorry stein. we do whatever it takes to fight cancer.

these are the specialists we're proud to call our own. experts from all over the world, working closely together to deliver truly personalized cancer care. expert medicine works here. learn more at cancercenter.com this is not a screensaver.game. this is the destruction of a cancer cell by the body's own immune system, thanks to medicine that didn't exist until now. and today can save your life. ♪ ♪ until her laptop crashed this morning. her salon was booked for weeks, having it problems? ask a business advisor how to get on demand tech support

for as little as $15 a month. right now, buy one hp ink and get a second at 30% off at office depot officemax almost 250 years ago, two lanterns were hung here to warn of the incoming attack on america. today we have to acknowledge what our president won't: our democracy is under attack again. donald trump praises vladimir putin and meets with him on foreign soil, while rejecting our own law enforcement officials who say putin launched a hostile attack on our last election and is planning to do it again this year. why would an american president want to meet with a dictator who's trying to undermine our democracy? is trump again getting played by putin, or is he conspiring with a man who helped put him in office? if paul revere and other patriots had waited to act until it was safe or politically correct, we would never have the country we have today. it's time for congress,

republicans and democrats, to put their political interests aside and act on behalf of our country.

joining us now, beck dorrie stein titled from the corner of the oval, a memoir detailing her time working in the oh bam a ma white house. so we have a lot to ask you. i want to start with this job of a stenographer. i'm not sure most americans realize there's a stenographer generally in the room with the president almost all the time keeping a written record of what's said and done inside that room. so let's start with your story. you're in d.c. you see an ad on craigslist. what happens next? >> i wasn't sure stenographers existed after 1950. to see it on craigslist was surprising. and it was a job at a law firm

for a stenographer. and i was like, i guess they'll teach me to type really taft. i was working five part-time jobs, i blew off the interview to be a photographer. when i eventually applied to this job, the stenographer job is actually at the white house, it's really important to be in the room, to put down your recorder's, to have a transcript of everything. there are five of us at the white house and the idea is to be discreet. we don't have a tiny type writer. we can't type in realtime. again, i got the job on craigslist. the whole idea is that we need to have a written word of everything. >> so how frequently were you in the room with president obama? >> anytime he spoke to a member of the press, we were in the room to make sure no one misquoted him by accident. so it was really important. >> why are you laughing? >> thank you very much. >> yeah. we shared the roosevelt room quite a few times and you often got placed next to the president. sometimes because you were in trouble or something.

>> that was a sign that the president took issue with something he would -- >> he wanted to keep you close. >> right. and one thing about president obama, he read everything. he read everything. now, you held over for a couple of months into the trump administration. but you found it a bit different? >> well, it was so different. president obama was a vor asiaus reader. it was crazy like how does he have time to do this? he was reading three different things at once. and with president trump, they had to provide illustrations because he didn't want to read anything longer than a page. >> when you say recorder, literally you -- >> we have two recorder's just like members of the press have. >> and you see you have a foot pedal to keep track.. what do you mean? >> i was not trained as a stenographer. we have this great cheat sheet in the form of a foot pedal. you can reverse and fast forward so you don't have to use a mouse. we're getting into the

technicalities. >> i know, but it's fass nationalin fascinating. >> so you say you quit about two months into the trump administration, is that right? >> yes, that's right. >> because you couldn't be proud of the work that you were doing any more. can you tell us a little bit about what specifically you witnessed that led you to that conclusion? >> sure. so president obama and his team were extremely committed to being transparent with the american people, having a transcript of everything for the press office, the press and the presidential archive. with president trump and his team, they didn't even tell us when they were meeting with members of the press. so there was no stenographer in the room for the lester holt interview with abc. we weren't there. and even when he met with bill o'reiley, he actually ended up taking bill o'reiley up to the oval office for an hour before their interview and i wasn't in the room for that. so -- >> i want to get philosophical. this white house, one of the defining features, it's

difficult to know where reality begins and where it ends. and one of the ways to do it is to have not just a written record, but obviously audio recordings. you know, your whole life for fo five years was based around getting history right. now that we seem to have abandon the idea of even recording it, it must be surreal for you. >> i think it's surreal for all of us to be in this time where it's like, oh, president trump just met with vladimir putin and now we're having to ask translators to talk to us about it because we can't trust him. how can we trust someone who doesn't even know how to use a double negative properly? >> fair point. >> you know, this is a unique opportunity because we have someone here at the table who has been in the oval office, witnessed how the president interacts with his aides and is not going to spin us about it. tell us, how does he tri-treeat people who work for him? what are some of the stories that you witnessed? >> it was a completely different experience from the moment i

walked in. there were maseratis in the pvlt. there had been fords before. trump and his team didn't respect the role of stenographers. i can only speak from my experience. we often weren't in the room and the way that women were treated when you walked by. everyone was suddenly in stilettos and it's like how can you run to the next meeting if you're all in stilettos. so there was much more of a focus on appearance rather than content. >> the president has a meeting with a reporter, during the obama administration, tell me how does it work in the obama administration and how did it change into the trump administration and why do you think you were excluded from those meetings? was there a reason given? >> no, no, there were no reasons given. we often couldn't get in touch with the press office who was technically our bosses and they were our supervisors. so, to, with the obama administration, we had the guidance, the schedule from the day before. we knew exactly what we had to

do. if something changed, we got an e-mail from the press office. there would be a phone call if there wasn't enough time for an e-mail. we always knew what was going on. with president trump, it was often left to people whose role it wasn't to include it. hey, beck, president trump just gaggled to the press and you weren't there for it. >> do you think they were willingly excluded you as in they didn't want a record of what was being said? >> you'd have to ask them. i had to wonder myself because it was like, hey, i'm here to protect you to make sure you're not misquoted. it would be so easy to stick to the truth and be like, hey, let's stick to the transcript. >> at what point did it end for you? >> when he was elected, i had some concerns. and then when i stepped into the west wing the first day and saw how much chaos was ensuing, it was like, i can't stay here. especially when i was there to do a job and i wasn't being asked to do that job. i wasn't being included in what i had trained to do.

>> the new memoir is "from the corner of the oval." >> thank you for having me. still ahead, president trump has plenty on his plate right now, but he's keeping an eye on what's to come. specifically, democratic challengers in 2020. we'll show you what he just said about that and bring in one of his could-be rivals from the white house. that's straight ahead. you're turning onto the street when you barely clip a passing car. minor accident - no big deal, right? wrong. your insurance company is gonna raise your rate after the other car got a scratch so small you coulda fixed it with a pen.

maybe you should take that pen and use it to sign up with a different insurance company. for drivers with accident forgiveness liberty mutual won't raise their rates because of their first accident. liberty mutual insurance. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty ♪ until her laptop crashed this morning. her salon was booked for weeks, having it problems? ask a business advisor how to get on demand tech support for as little as $15 a month. right now, buy one hp ink and get a second at 30% off at office depot officemax where we're changing withs? contemporary make-overs. then, use the ultimate power handshake, the upper hander with a double palm grab. who has the upper hand now? start winning today. book now at lq.com. if you have moderate to severe plaque psoriasis, little things can be a big deal. that's why there's otezla. otezla is not an injection or a cream. it's a pill that treats 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 use if you're allergic to otezla. otezla may cause severe diarrhea, nausea, or vomiting. tell your doctor if these occur. otezla is associated with an increased 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. other side effects include upper respiratory tract infection and headache. tell your doctor about all the medicines you take and if you're pregnant or planning to be. ♪ otezla. show more of you. yes or no?gin. do you want the same tools and seamless experience across web and tablet? do you want $4.95 commissions for stocks, $0.50 options contracts? $1.50 futures contracts?

what about a dedicated service team of trading specialists? did you say yes? good, then it's time for power e*trade. the platform, price and service that gives you the edge you need. looks like we have a couple seconds left. let's do some card twirling twirling cards e*trade. the original place to invest online.

dom, good morning. what are you looking at? >> we're watching the auto tariff side of things because if president trump's tariffs go through on imported cars, consumers will pay more for those vehicles. this is according to the peterson institute of economics. they say the price of a new car could rise anywhere from $1400 to $7,000 per vehicle. but it's not just the bmws or mercedes. pretty much all cars sold in the u.s., even the domestically made ones use foreign auto parts, so prices there could rise, as well, just maybe not by as much

as those cars fully assembled outside the u.s. using non-u.s. parts. speaking of those foreign carmakers, many moved their operations right here to america. but now those operations may take a hit because of the trade war. you have volvo whose reinvestment plan could be rerailed because of these trade issues. volvo opened up a plant just outside charleston last month. that plan is to make cars for export later on this fall. threats to global trade would absolutely affect exportation plans. and that south carolina plant could employ up to 4,000 people. half of those employees would make cars for export and fewer exports means fewer jobs. it is worth noting, willie, oval cars is owned by chinese automaker giley. >> dominic chu wrapping it up

for it. thank you. still ahead, president obama knows who he would like to face in the 2020 election. the guy who once said he would like to take him behind the gym and fight if they were in high school. so, i have this recurring dream. i'm 85 years old in a job where i have to wear a giant hot dog suit. what? where's that coming from? i don't know. i started my 401k early, i diversified... i'm not a big spender. sounds like you're doing a lot. but i still feel like i'm not gonna have enough for retirement. like there's something else i should be doing. with the right conversation, you might find you're doing okay. so, no hot dog suit? not unless you want to. no. schedule a complimentary goal planning session today with td ameritrade®. ♪ ♪

let your perfect drive come together at the lincoln summer invitation sales event. get 0% apr on select 2018 lincoln models plus $1,000 bonus cash. until her laptop crashed this morning. her salon was booked for weeks, having it problems? ask a business advisor how to get on demand tech support for as little as $15 a month. right now, buy one hp ink and get a second at 30% off at office depot officemax let's do an ad of a man eating free waffles at comfort inn.

they taste like victory because he always gets the lowest price on our rooms, guaranteed, when he books direct at choicehotels.com. or just say badda book, badda boom. book now at choicehotels.com. mitzi: psoriatic arthritis tries to get in my way? watch me. ( ♪ ) mike: i've tried lots of things for my joint pain. now? watch me. ( ♪ ) joni: think i'd give up showing these guys

how it's done? please. real people with active psoriatic arthritis are changing the way they fight it. they're moving forward with cosentyx. it's a different kind of targeted biologic. it's proven to help people find less joint pain and clearer skin. don't use if you are allergic to cosentyx. before starting cosentyx you should be checked for tuberculosis. an increased risk of infections and lowered ability to fight them may occur. tell your doctor if you have an infection or symptoms of an infection. or if you have received a vaccine, or plan to. if you have inflammatory bowel disease tell your doctor if symptoms develop or worsen. serious allergic reactions may occur. mitzi: with less joint pain, watch me. for less joint pain and clearer skin, ask your rheumatologist about cosentyx. let me ask you about 2020. >> okay. >> who do you think your democratic opponent will be in joe biden says he'll make a

decision. >> look, joe biden ran three times. he never got more than 1%. and president obama took him out of the garbage heap and everybody was shocked that he did. i'd love to have it be biden. i think i'd like to have any one of those people that we're talking about, you know, there's probably the group of seven or eight right now, i'd really like to run against any one of them. >> joe biden from the garbage he says the president of the united states the democrats he'd like to square off against in 2020. this weekend, will become the next chair of the national governors association. the governor of montana, democratic steve bullock. mr. governor, good to see you. before we get to announce your 2020 run here in a few minutes as i'm sure you're here to do for us exclusively on morning joe, let's talk about your new role, the head of the governors association is historically a big role and a prestigious role in national politics. what do you believe as a

democrat who was elected and re-elected in a red state, in a state that president trump won by 21 point, you were re-elected in that same year. what's your message to national democrats? what should they be saying to their voters? >> i think we need to begin with those voters, willie. for many folks, america feels broken. half of 30-year-olds aren't doing better than their parents were when they were 30. our political system, even just this week, somehow was lost that the treasury secretary made it so dark money group, the koch brotheres or foreign influence going into these dark money groups don't even have to report their donors. so the political system is not working for americans. they don't have faith it can actually work. that's leading to a lot of broken social bonds where folks are saying that this country is not working as well as it could. i think what democrats need to be doing going forward is recognizing that not everybody's

getting ahead and we can work with them in doing so. in restoring faith in our political system and building america up, not trying to divide us. >> you know, there's a prevailing theory that going after donald trump may be the democrat's best way to win the house in 2018 and perhaps to take back the white house in 2020. how do you walk that line in your own state? what would you tell your state about the balance between touting your own policies and attacking a popular president within the democratic party? >> there's a lot to be against what he's doing. you look at this week, even alone, but it's not just enough to be against him. we also have to stand for things. we have to recognize at the end of the day a lot of folks don't feel like they're getting ahead. a lot of what government is doing isn't helping them a long that path. so it's certainly pointing out that america's a lot better than

a lot of things donald trump's doing. but also saying that we or i, all democrat, will be working to make sure folks can climb up the economic ladder. that they can get health care. that they can graduate from college within hundreds of thousands of dollars of debt. that they can get the skills they need to move their family forward. >> governor, it's heidi. i'm so glad you're here. you can speak uniquely to an issue that i think is not getting enough attention. that is the fact that in 2018, the map for governor's races is exactly the opposite of the map in the summit. democrats have an abundance of opportunities. specifically also in the industry midwest. wondering if you can explain what the consequences of -- and the stakes are for that, especially given that these governors will oversee a new round of redistricting with the census in 2020. >> yes, there's over 30 races up

in 2018 as far as governor's races. i think there's a real -- this is a chance to do a lot of the reset. while so many folks focus on washington, d.c., first, things need to get done at the state level. as you point out, if you really want a fairer house, a lot of that happens through redistricting panels in 2020. we need to make sure, a lot more efforts to ensure that at the end of the day what we're doing is drawing up fair competitive districts, not districts that are gerrymanders for republicans. and governors in many states across the country have a significant role in doing that. >> governor sam stein here, you know, the states really do oversee election security. it's a state by state system. you're about to take over the situation. on a scale of one to ten, how would you rate the electoral

security of our nation states? >> well, sam, i think it's something that every governor needs to be paying attention to. because i can't speak for every state. but from the perspective of making sure that americans really have faith and trust in our electoral system, we've got to make sure our ballot boks are secure and there's the integrity there. encourage other governors to do everything we can to be sure there can't be manipulation on problems with election security. as we're seeing morgue and more in this digital world, there can be some real significant problems. >> governor, before we let you go, there are a lot of people looking at you within the democratic party because you are progressive. you increase education funding. you fought for equal pay for women. you've expanded medicaid in a red state, again, and won election and re-election. i suspect you're not going to

give us a declaration now, but if someone said to you, and said we'd like you to run for president what would you say? >> we would probably say that both i have a lot of work still to do as governor. i'm honored to be natural governor association chair. i think we have figured out ways in minnesoachine montana to mov forward and bridge some divides that are increasingly coming in the country and have an important voice to play in that role. but i think that 2020's still a long time away. >> something a lot of people are keeping an eye on. thank you so much for your time. appreciate it. >> thanks so much for having me. >> rapid fire, we've got some final thoughts here. rick tyler. >> i would like to ask the governor what kind of stylistic candidate the democrats would put forward to counteract trump. we watched him wipe out 16 republicans. who would actually be a viable candidate to beat him. >> sam. >> as you know, i only have worked for digital publications. all digital sam. >> so young, so hip. >> heidi.

>> while we're focused on putined putin ed and trump, in the meantime i'm seeing reports that real wages are now falling. in the six months after the tax cuts. premium spikes in health care. we're just at the very front end of the -- >> this end of the table, hold your final thoughts until tomorrow morning. you have to come back. that does it for us this morning. stephanie ruhle picks up our coverage right now. hey, stef. >> thanks, willie. good morning, everyone, i'm stephanie ruhle with a lot to cover today. starting with lost in translation. the president sewed even more confusion, is that possible, about his comments defending russia over u.s. intelligence agencies and contradicting them yet again at a cabinet meeting and then changing course and his tone about putin and russia interference. >> just like i consider myself to be responsible for things that happen in this country. so certainly as the leader of a country, you would have to hold him responsible, ye