including paul butler. but "am joy" starts right now with joy reid. >> he knows the truth, i know the truth. others know the truth. here's the truth -- the people of the united states of america, the people of the world don't believe what he's saying. the man doesn't tell the truth. and it's sad that i should take responsibility for his dirty deeds. >> good morning. welcome to "am joy." we have lots to get to this morning including that alarming ruling on healthcare. stay tuned for that. first, thanks to the man you just heard, michael cohen, in court filings over the last few weeks donald trump is facing the worst few weeks of his presidency. in fact, the whole thing could be in peril. he has the spiraling scandals around himself, his businesses and his campaign to thank for it. those scandals are proceeding along three tracks, any of which could be criminal. track one, trump's potential

participation in a scheme to trade help from russia in the form of dirt on hillary clinton in the chance to build a trump tower in moscow for something russia really wanted badically, the relaxation of sanctions that keep russian oligarchs and vladimir putin from moving money in the west. more on that later. track two, the lengths to which donald trump was apparently willing to go to get the job that would allow him to get his moscow tower, including being in the room, participating in an illegal scheme to pay off women he allegedly had affairs with so their stories wouldn't keep him from getting elected. more on that later. we start with track three. the potential criminal selling of the office of the presidency, starting with the inauguration. the "wall street journal" broke that story thursday saying federal prosecutors in manhattan are investigating whether president trump's 2017 inaugural

committee misspent some of the record 107 million it raised from donations. according to people from mill yar with the matter. prosecutors are also investigating whether top donors gave money in exchange to access the administration. joining me now to break this down is ellie and matthew miller, and richard painter. everyone knows when inaugurals come around, lots of people donate. corporations donate. rich people donate. at what point does it become illegal? there's a couple different ways it could be illegal. right now we're finding out the facts. one is if it's from a foreign donor, you cannot have foreign donations. putting that aside, even if we're talking about domestic

donors, they cannot donate with the promise that they're going to get an official act done by the elected official in exchange. >> right. >> so that would be bribery. >> yeah. >> it's a hard standard to meet under case law, but that's the clearest example. there are others. there are tax issues. the way the money seems to have been spent here with going back to a trump-owned property. we don't know how it was dispersed. there's potential money laun laundering. >> the "new york times" has their own piece on this. the inquiry focuses on whether people from middle eastern nations used straw donors to disguise their donations to the two funds. federal law prohibits foreign contributions to federal campaigns, political action

committees. the trump inaugural committee says the pic is not aware of any pending investigations and has not been contacted by any prosecutor. we simply have not information that an investigation exists. we don't know. we just have their word for it. >> do you remember in "the firm" how tom cruise brings down the entire mob on billing? here we have ivanka trump as part of the trump organization overbilling the inaugural committee. this is the first time we talked about don jr., we talked about eric. this is the first time we have i vankkivanka in the cross hairs. she reportedly was involved in overcharging the inaugural committee and somebody had to tell her this will look bad if we get audited. for a long time i thought the

only way to get to trump is if you go after the kids. if you put the kids in legal peril, that will shock him out of his lying, legal cocoon. >> i will read a bit of this, this is the i vank kvanka in the story. in the beginning ivanka was involved in negotiating the price the hotel charged the inaugural committee for venue rentals. ivanka and others were e-mailed and i expressed my concern that the hotel was overcharging for its event spaces, worrying of what would happen when this audited. every time someone swipes their card at that hotel, they're

paying an emolument to donald trump. now they're not only swiping but also upping the price. is this is a clear-cut case of corruption? >> absolutely. there are emoluments here, that's a constitutional term for profit and benefit that are coming in to this presidential inaugural committee illegally from foreign governments including some middle eastern governments that want to have influence over the united states, they can kill as many journalists as they wanted and do whatever they want and get away with it. you hahave money coming in illegally to this presidential inaugural committee in addition to the money going directly to the trump hotel from the saudi government and other middle eastern governments. then you have the money going out of the presidential inaugural committee through conflict of interest transactions.

this type of conduct, with respect to a non-profit organization, which is what the pic is, a non-profit, it can be a serious crime. it's basically embezzlement. you're taking too much out. it's like taking money out of the church collection plate. people go to jail for this. i would not be surprised to see some people indicted with respect to the money coming into the presidential inaugural committee and the money going out. it's about time some people go to the slammer for this kind of thing. it's ridiculous. >> matthew, there's a finding that people -- we'll talk about this later in the show. you can't indict a sitting president. there's nothing about the president's daughter. paying for rooms, meals, event space at that washington hotel, somehow that got approved for him to have a hotel down the street from the white house where everyone goes and does their meetings and eats. the inaugural committee, if you look at how much he raised, donald trump's inaugural

committee raised twice what president obama's did. 1$107 million. president obama in 2008, the big one, $53 million. and they had major celebrities and acts. this was a huge inauguration for president obama that was much better attended, had a-list talent. donald trump had jugglers and tractor pulls and stuff. no offense to jugglers and tr t tractor pulls, but i'm not sure it's worth 1$107 million. >> i think they have a significant problem. that's a question investigators will try to get. the trump inaugural committee raised twice as much money as the first obama inaugural committee did and held significantly fewer events. you ask what happened, were they spending too much at the events? that seems to be the case based on the story. was there money being funneled

out of the inaugural committee into the hands and pockets of people that worked there and close to the trump family? we don't know the answer to that. we know rick gates testified at paul manafort's trial that he submitted reimbursements that were inappropriate. the question is were there other people doing the same. i think what you see, this is throughout the trump orbit, as his white house, private business, whenever you start turning over rocks at what looks like criminal enterprises you never find just one crime. you find tax fraud, embezz embezzlement, a host of different crimes. now we have questions being raised of the inaugural committee. we have one lobbyist who already pled guilty in a separate case for illegal le fly funneling mo into the trump inaugural

committee. as we see more scrutiny from the prosecutors of the southern district of new york, we'll see crimes i think in a number of different areas. >> trump keeps trying to move the goalposts. unless they have him on tape saying "da" bigley, there's no collusion. >> right. >> when there's these different legs of his clear corruption and involvement with foreign governments, but also the other bad things he's done. to think that the smoking gun here is him, again, on tape with putin, that's not what it is. it's all of these money drtrail circling around him and closing in on him. >> people are not clear why he wanted to be president. but we're seeing this story line emerge. there was a lot of money to be made on having that kind of position and power, whether it's the prestige of being -- even

just a candidate for president. and that being able to translate into a trump tower moscow. the one thing we know about donald trump, he loves money. he loves to put his name on things. now if you have this possibility, at least, that one of the ways they were making money was to say this cup of tea at the trump tower in d.c. is not $5, it's $40. for a prosecutor, is that just a simple through line to a crime? >> yeah. i think we've all sort of mentioned different possibilities. we need to know more facts. knowing something is corrupt, seems corrupt, is different than meeting the elements of crime. >> americans tend to think all politics are a crime. how do we distinguish? >> for tax crimes coming to mind immediately, if they were making money illegally, even if it wasn't technically a crime, if they were pocketing money they shouldn't have, then they probably weren't declaring it on

taxes. the idea of -- embezzlement is the most simple crime, as i think richard painter mentioned, and wire fraud. if you're sending invoices out claiming something costs $100, the cup of tea, when it's really $5, that's wire fraud. there's a host of statutes. as eli said and many different people have said, we're talking about a scheme here. it's easy to look at each of these in isolation. when you put them together, it seems like a giant fraud scheme. >> yeah. >> and the trump organization seems to be at the heart of it. whether you're talking about dealings with russia, trying to make money in underhanded ways, dealings through the inauguration committee, the illegal election payments, campaign finance fraud. that to me starts to feel more like a racketeering organization. >> the thing is, richard, a lot of these properties that we call

trump properties are not owned by donald trump. at least one of them is owned by the u.s. taxpayer. i'm still befuddled as to how a president of the united states can lease a hotel from the united states government and then potentially work these schemes through that property and that be okay with the federal government. >> because everybody is ignoring the law. the general services administration signed a lease with him that specifically prohibited a united states government official from having an interest in the hotel. but they don't want to enforce that lease. they came up with a convoluted opinion that explains away the clear terms of the lease. the emoluments from foreign governments going that hotel, illegal. congress won't enforce the law. that's been the problem over the past two years. but now we got bob mueller catching up with the president. we have the southern district of new york.

we have the new york attorney general. criminal investigations, multiple charges on multiple fronts against top associates. i do believe it's time for president trump to work out a plea deal, resign the presidency, take lower charges, and let this country move on. this will be a very, very ugly two years if he insists on staying in the white house and fighting criminal charges that are inevitable. it's clear he committed multiple crimes. he ought to be working on his plea deal as we work on putting together the country again. >> matthew, he would be working on that plea deal with the justice department that previously helmed by jefferson sessions, who was clearly trying not to be called mr. magoo every day. and the current set don't seem motivated to do anything other than look around. who is the entity that ends up doing what richard painter just

said? not this justice department, right? >> the best legal defense that the president what is staying in office. as long as he's in office, as long as the opinion that currently exists is the department of justice policy and i have no reason to think it will change, he can't be indicted. if he were reelected and the statue of limitations on some of these allegedly criminal acts that he committed during the 2016 election, that expires in 2021. by the time he finishes his second term he would be basically immune to federal prosecution, unless it was a conspiracy and acts had continued while he is in office. >> the department of justice, while they can't under this current administration do anything, they just can't sit there. if the president of the united states has committed a crime but they can't bring charges against

him, part ochf that rational is mechanism of accountability. you have to see the department of justice either through an indictment that names him a co-conspirator or makes all the evidence public or in a referral to congress, they have to make that information available to congress somehow. while we've seen people like orrin hatch dismiss the idea of a crime, some republican senators have been backing off that and afraid to get too far out on a limb when they don't know what the full evidence will show. i do think at the end of the day, if there's compelling evidence of a crime that the american people see, that stand that republicans have been taking that these just are not serious crimes, i'm not sure that's politically tenable as they think it is today. >> orrin hatch did walk back his "i don't care." he did realize that was a weird thing to say. before we go, on this question there is the sense a lot of people have that there are certain people placed by random

oic opinions above the law. you did a story about jeffrey epstein who was caught abusing children. >> yeah. >> money gets you out of it being president gets you out of accountability to the law? that sounds like two classes of american citizens. one who have to be accountable to the law, one who don't. that does not sound right. >> exactly. so it's not just the victims in the epstein case that are harmed here by this injustice, which seems to be based on what we know, it's the american people who lose faith in the justice system. it needs to be the same rules for everyone. the president, jeffrey epstein. remember, acosta is his secretary of labor. >> yes. >> he's the one who cut this unbelievable deal. >> he's employed now at taxpayer expense inside the united states government after cutting a deal for somebody caught dead to rights abusing children. >> there needs to be an official

investigation. >> i want everyone to check out mimi's great piece on this. it is frightening to think there are people who are above the law. just by being president, you can stick yourself out above the law. we will debate on this show whether a sitting president can be above the law or if they can be indicted. thank you, appreciate it. next up, that question. can the president of the united states be indicted? don't go anywhere. what happened to you? i got beat up because i was different. you can't keep on running away from your problems. so, i created a world where i can heal. welcome to marwen. the only way you're going to get better, is if you face those jerks who beat you up. i'm not really sure how to do this. we got your back. we always have your back. i have my art and i have my friends.

i have hope and that's something they can't take away from me. hell yeah. discover card. i justis this for real?match, yep. we match all the cash back new cardmembers earn at the end of their first year, automatically. whoo! i got my money! hard to contain yourself, isn't it? uh huh! let it go! whoo! get a dollar-for-dollar match at the end of your first year. only from discover.

this is moving day with the best in-home wifi experience and millions of wifi hotspots to help you stay connected. and this is moving day with reliable service appointments in a two-hour window so you're up and running in no time. show me decorating shows. this is staying connected with xfinity to make moving... simple. easy. awesome. stay connected while you move with the best wifi experience and two-hour appointment windows. click, call or visit a store today.

good evening. president nixon has been named by a grand jury as a conspirator in the watergate cover up. that was disclosed today and confirmed by the president's lawyer. the grand jury reaction was taken last more much when it returned indictments against a former number of presidential aides. the special prosecutor who presented that evidence argued that a president cannot be indicted. so the jury voted unanimously to name mr. nixon as an unindicted conspirator. >> it's a question that's never been answered. can a sitting president be charged with a crime? it never came to that for richard nixon. two months after the nation learned that nixon was named as

an unindicted co-conspirator, he resigned from office. as mr. trump's lawyer heads to prison for three years, that question is relevant once again. joining us now is danny savalas. we'll go around the table quickly. danny, can a sitting president be indicted? >> well, there is no yes or no. >> lawyers never say yes or no. >> we do not. we do not as a rule. i would say generally no, though i'm probably in the minority. strangely enough i may be in the minority on this but also in accordance with current doj regulations. >> doj regulations are not the law. they can change at any time. if there was a regulation how would that override the fact that no person is above the law? >> i would point to two pieces of evidence. first is the language of the constitution which appears to

imply a sitting president would first be impeached, then tried, convicted, then removed and then thereafter he can be subject to criminal prosecution. it doesn't, pli explicitly say , but it implies that. the president is the only person in the entire government that if you arrest him and put him in jail, you arrest the entire executive branch. many people say wait a minute, the president can step in. not so fast. the vice president only steps in if the president is impeached and removed. theoretically you have a president running the executive branch from a jail cell. >> yeah. let's read that constitutional provision. article 1, section 3. judgment in cases of impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from office and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust or profit under the united

states, but the party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to indictment, trial, judgment and punishment according to the law. ellie, do you disagree with danny? >> yes. bottom line donald trump can be indicted. we need to reframe the debate here. it's not a question of if, it's a question of when. he's not the queen. this is not sparta. nobody is above the law. so we know that he can be indicted or else laws don't matter. the simple question is whether he can be indicted when he's president. as you pointed out about the doj guidelines. that's courtesy we're extending to him because he perhaps has codes we might need. that courtesy can be rescinded. while impeachment is the only way to remove him from the office, there's nothing in the constitution that says he cannot be indicted while in office. at that point some might argue he will be incapacitated

triggering the 25th donald tru is a man who can be indicted for a crime, that answer has to be yes. >> mimi, you can be the tiebreaker on this. this is michael cohen, who we know is a criminal, because he's admitted to being a criminal. he admitted to crimes. full stop. he will seventy-two years for crimes. person -- individual one, who he says directed him to commit those crimes is donald trump. >> and he knew it was wrong? >> of course. >> and he was doing that to help his election? >> yes. he was very concerned about how this would affect the election. >> to help his campaign? >> to help him and the campaign. >> is that a crime? >> can be. >> to direct your lawyer to commit crimes in order to secure an election? >> yes. there's a willfulness intent

that is too far in the weeds here to show trump knew he was violating a specific law. let me -- first, we don't have to rely on michael cohen. the prosecutors, the southern district of new york career prosecutors who do these kinds of things all the time have basically alleged this in their documents. the judge essentially adopted it when he said individual one directed cohen. >> right. >> and i think there is plenty of evidence to show trump's willfulness. i think yes. i would bring that crime to the grand jury right now. i would do that. one other thing, i think both are right in terms of the yes or no, can he be indicted. as a practical matter, if i'm putting myself as a prosecutor now, i can't indict him. i have that opinion. i have to follow it. can that be challenged? should that be revisited? yes, absolutely for a lot of the reasons we're saying, especially with this president where the rationals and justifications

behind that olc memo don't make sechb sense. >> this is my challenge with your opinion, danny. if donald trump because of this memo cannot be indicted for kriting crimkrit i committing crimes, that means he could theoretically get away with murder. he could commit a crime, as long as he remains president, not it. he could rob a bank. commit any crime he wanted. this would create a free fire zone of criminality for any president if all they have do is run out the statute of limitations by staying in office. >> one solution is a sealed indictment that survives. the statute of limitations doesn't run in a conspiracy until the last day of the last act of the conspiracy. if president trump were a one-term president, you're still within the statute for several of these crimes. let's take these regulations and opinions and throw them out. perhaps the strongest argument

is the prosecution of a president for preoffice activities. if you waged war against some country, i don't think that's fair, that's a crime. we agree official acts such as declaring war are probably immune from prosecution. the strongest argument is pre-office activities. if you do believe the president can be prosecuted for those pre-office activities, maybe it's true you can indict him. it's a separate question on whether you can prosecute him while in office. what about if the crimes involve crim crimes -- crimes involving crimes to get you into office. if trump is found to have committed crimes to be president, he should not be allowed to use the fact that he happens to be president to implicate him from the crime that got him to be president.

it's a bit of a circle, but it should stop him at some point. the question is, at some basic level this becomes a political question. whether he can be indicted or removed or prosecuted. it all goes back down to when are 20-odd republicans going to realize that the president is a criminal and something needs to be done about it. >> the evidence is never. if we have a situation where republicans say no matter what is found we will only protect this president. full stop. if the justice department says no matter what is found, we cannot prosecute this president. have we not then a king? >> yeah, then our system has broken down. that's part of what i was saying about maybe the olc memo needs to be revisited in that context where we seem to have a congress not willing to, you know, stand up and do its job. >> not at all. >> yeah. >> they're not going to do it.

that's the question, whether we have a president or a king. this was a great debate. thank you very much. ellie and danny will come back. coming up, the latest member of the trump administration throwing in the towel. that's next. shaquem get in here. take your razor, yup. alright, up and down, never side to side, shaquem. you got it? come on, get back. quem, you a second behind your brother, stay focused. can't nobody beat you, can't nobody beat you. hard work baby, it gonna pay off. you got this. with the one hundred and forty-first pick, the seattle seahawks select. alright, you got it, shaquem. alright, let me see.

if you have postmenopausal osteoporosis and a high risk for fracture now might not be the best time to ask yourself are my bones strong? life is full of make-or-break moments. that's why it's so important to help reduce your risk of fracture with prolia®.

only prolia® is proven to help strengthen and protect bones from fracture with 1 shot every 6 months. do not take prolia® if you have low blood calcium, are pregnant, are allergic to it, or take xgeva®. serious allergic reactions, like low blood pressure; trouble breathing; throat tightness; face, lip, or tongue swelling; rash; itching; or hives have happened. tell your doctor about dental problems as severe jaw bone problems may happen or new or unusual pain in your hip groin, or thigh, as unusual thigh bone fractures have occurred. speak to your doctor before stopping prolia® as spine and other bone fractures have occurred. prolia® can cause serious side effects, like low blood calcium, serious infections, which could need hospitalization, skin problems, and severe bone, joint, or muscle pain. are you ready? ask your doctor how prolia® can help strengthen your bones. with lower expense ratios than comparable vanguard funds. and we're now offering zero expense ratio index funds. that's value you'll only find at fidelity. ♪ one thing leads another

that's value you'll only find at fidelity. you've worked so hard to (huachieve so much. perhaps it's time to partner with someone who knows you well enough to understand what your wealth is really for.

breaking this morning. embattled interior secretary ryan zinke is expected to announce his resignation on wednesday after months of investigations into his travel, political activity and potential conflicts of interest. he will leave at the end of the year just before democrats who vow to grill him take over the house. of course. coming up, russiagate, patient zero.

♪ let's do the thing that you do. let's clear a path. let's put down roots. let's build something. let's do the thing that you do. let's do the thing that changes the shape of everything... that pushes us forward and keeps us going. let's do the work. ...that's why i've got the power of 1-2-3 medicines with trelegy. the only fda-approved 3-in-1 copd treatment. ♪ trelegy. the power of 1-2-3 ♪ trelegy 1-2-3 trelegy

with trelegy and the power of 1-2-3, i'm breathing better. trelegy works 3 ways to... ...open airways,... ...keep them open... ...and reduce inflammation... ...for 24 hours of better breathing. trelegy won't replace a rescue inhaler for sudden breathing problems. trelegy is not for asthma. tell your doctor if you have a heart condition or high blood pressure before taking it. do not take trelegy more than prescribed. trelegy may increase your risk of thrush, pneumonia, and osteoporosis. call your doctor if worsened breathing, chest pain, mouth or tongue swelling,.. ...problems urinating, vision changes, or eye pain occur. think your copd medicine is doing enough? maybe you should think again. ask your doctor about once-daily trelegy and the power of 1-2-3. ♪ trelegy 1-2-3 save at trelegy.com.

i can't tell you anything about myself. but believe me... i'm not your average consumer. that's why i switched to liberty mutual. they customized my car insurance, so i only pay for what i need. and as a man... uh... or a woman... with very specific needs that i can't tell you about- say cheese. mr. landry? oh no. hi mr. landry! liberty mutual customizes your car insurance so you only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪

today i'm announcing a series of measures that will continue to increase the costs on russia and those responsible for what's happening in ukraine. we are imposing sanctions on specific individuals responsible for undermining the sovereignty, territorial integrity and government of ukraine. we're making it clear there's consequences for their actions. >> could that moment when president obama imposed sanctions on russia for their invasion of ukraine and their seizure of crimea, could that have sparked the beginnings of russiagate as we know it. is russia's desperate request for sanctions relief at the heart of the many problems in the trump campaign. let's go to malcolm. you talk a lot about the fact that what targets somebody for

russia to use them is need and greed. on the greed front, donald trump clearly wanted to build a trump tower moscow. we know that from michael cohen from robert mueller's office, if the project was completed the company could have received hundreds of millions of dollars from russian sources in licensing fees and other revenues. trump wanted it so badically that they even discussed giving vladimir putin a $50 million penthouse in trump tower moscow. is the origin of russiagate, russians understanding that president trump wanted this and he might want the lucrative benefit so badly he might give them sanctions relief in exchange? >> i think if that's the case then the russians evaluated this and made that determination in 1987 when they were the soviet union and donald trump went over there to try and build a hotel in st. petersburg and in moscow.

as they transitioned to the russian federation, they just kept this personality in an envelope and saw over time that he was really going to be an asset to them. however i really -- based on my reporting, this first contact with donald trump related to the presidency started the night that mitt romney failed to defeat barack obama. that's 2012. within 12 months they toad up the internet research agency and started doing operations to support him. he was meeting at miss universe with the 2 with the top richest men in moscow, then donald trump was supporting vladimir putin in his tweets. so he was primed up. did the execute order go in 2014? i think it was earlier than that, but they were on board by that time. >> that's the point.

there's no evidence that russians have some great particular respect for donald trump or any affinity from him apart from the fact that if he was in office he could do the one thing they want, relax sanctions. you go to michael flynn, who we know went to that dinner for r.t., was paid for, had to resign. if you look at the timeline, he gets in in november and out by january 26th after sally yates says he is lying about the nature of his calls to kislyaki. the question of why he lied about his kislyak contacts has always been on the table. mother jones reporting, one of those flynn associates who each asked not to be identified notes flynn said he discussed with kislyak a grand bargain in which moscow would cooperate with the trump administration to resolve

the syrian conflict and washington would end or ease up on the sanctions imposed on russia for its annexation of cry merya and military intervention in ukraine. let me show you dump talking specifically about sanctions. >> i believe i would get along nicely with putin. okay? i mean where we have the strength. i don't think you need the sanctions. >> bill brodeur, do you believe the auothe origins of russiagat the sanctions? >> this stuff, as malcolm says, this goes back much earlier than 2014. in 2012 when the ma knact was p, putin said it was his single largest foreign policy act was

to have the magnitsky act repealed. putin has a lot of assets held in the names of friends and allies of him overseas so putin feels vulnerable with his own money. so putin wants to get rid of the magnitsky act and other sanctions because they touch him and his friends. then what does putin do? he looks at every possible way in which he can achieve that objective. all of a sudden he has this guy coming into the campaign who has expressed sympathies towards him. of course he's going to allocate huge resources across the board to try to make something happen. and this story is one of probably 50 or 100 different operations that they were organizing either on an official secret police level or an unofficial oligarch connected to amateur level.

this one happened to work. >> it seems like russia made a calculation of all the people who said they wanted to run for president, this was the one person who might give them everything they wanted. that does feel like a reason for all of these resources to be directed at all of these trump associat associates. >> you're absolutely right. they executed a strategic operation to coopt one half of the american political system. and that operation, maria butina started her activities in 2010 and 2011. vladimir putin once he became president of the russian federation in 2000, as an ex-kgb officer started to see the only way to make russia great again is to cut the united states down. by 2010, 2012 when he came back

for his second tour as president, he saw that the united states and activities that they were carrying out like the magnitsky act, was taken all of their elicit stolen money and laundering it worldwide. he had to end that and the best way to do that is to destroy the united states by finally putting in a manipulatable character that you can -- you can use as your puppet. by doing that, they have now achieved peak chaos. something the soviet union has never managed to achieve. they run the president of the united states. >> yeah. bill, having gone up against this regime in moscow, do you believe they consider their donald trump operation at this point to be a success? >> it's kind of successful but it kind of isn't because whatever donald trump thinks and whatever he says, and he has

said a lot of crazy things including offering to hand me over to vladimir putin at the helsinki summit, none of this stuff he can achieve. and he can't achieve it because congress won't let him achieve it, the courts won't let him achieve t the departmeit, the d justice won't let him achieve it. so he's going along with putin on a tweet level, a public statement level. but in terms of execution he has not been able to do the stuff -- or i should say putin has not been able to get him to do the stuff that putin wants. america supporting ukraine, america not repealing sanctions. >> i think their big miscal miscalculation was they thought the ship of the united states was easier to turn. thank you both. we'll have much more on maria butina next. coming up at the top of the hour, a federal judge just ruled

that the affordable care act is unconstitutional. we'll tell you what all that means. stay with us. ♪ it's the time of the season for loving ♪

for a limited time, $50 for them $10 for you. applebee's. now that's eatin' good in the neighborhood. on thursday, 30-year-old russian national maria butina

pleaded guilty to charges she was working in the united states as an unregistered agent of the russian government. according to court filings she worked in concert with a prominent russian oligarch named torshin to infiltrate the nra and use those connections to gain access to republican presidential candidates. joining me now is sarah. what is your view of the butina case? >> well, it's significant in a number of ways. it's emblematic of the rbroader of the incursion of russia into the u.s. political affairs. second it opens up the door to exploring the role of dark money in the u.s. presidential campaign, especially the role of the nra, which is funding the gop at levels we've never seen. it takes advantage of states like mine, missouri, which don't have real laws or limits on the

use of dark money to brick certain candidates into office. it basically deprives us of a real representative democracy in which we the voters are choosing our officials. instead they're fueled by fund force an intervfunds for an intervention. >> ms. butina claimed she had a signed agreement with the national rifle association in october of 2013, she traveled to israel to meet with members of a gun rights group called the association for the promotion of weapons culture. in a facebook post the apwc wrote that butina told them the right to bear arms was signed with cooperating countries and with the american nra, saying we're probably next in line. there is no right to bear arms in russia. what do you make of the fact that this seems like a multi national scheme to use the idea of gun rights to try and get in to the republican party?

>> yeah. it's a pretty pathetic look for the nra and for the republicans that on one hand they're this easily manipulated but also complicit. there are people who will be indicted themselves for failing to register as foreign agents. it's obvious their loyalty is to themselves, their wallets, to russian operatives, and possibly to foreign countries. the other thing significant about this is how far back it goes. if you look at 2013, you have an interesting year for trump, russia, the nra and all these operatives. she was meeting up with an israeli alleged gun group before coming to the u.s. in october. if you look at november, that's when the miss universe pageant was held, when trump was going to moscow. in december you have the rt gala in the second week. right before that, you have a group of nra officials, including people like david clark also coming over to

russia. so that's a lot of activity in a small amount of time. then, of course, it culminated in the trump campaign and continued during the time up to that campaign and afterwards. they have not stopped. they have no shame. >> absolutely. in the last block we talked about the fact this for the russians is about one thing, removing sanctions. i want you to listen to adam schiff who will soon have more power in the house. take a listen. >> there's a common denominator about a lot of these issues and a lot to of these characters you're mentioning. as you played earlier, maria butina's conversation with donald trump in that interview was about sanctions. mike flynn was lying about his conversation with the russian ambassador about tank shuns. the meeting in trump tower between kushner and manafort and don junior that they later denied happened but then said it happened but it was about adoptions, that was about sanctions. time and time again there's a marriage of business interests,

making money and talk about sanctions. >> is the simple explanation is that russia wanted sanctions released so they could make money in the west? >> pretty much. it's very obvious. this is not hard to figure out and it blows my mind people didn't figure this out before. of course russia wants sanctions dropped. of course billionaires and oligarchs wanted sanctions dropped. russia has imperialistic visions. that's why they had sanctions on them in in the first place. this was all openly discussed. we have a president now reluctant to enforce those sanctions because he's potentially acting as a russian asset and russian agent. >> i wish we had a congress that would do something about it. >> that would be nice. >> maybe in 2019.

thank you. more "am joy" after the break. makes more holiday deliveries to homes than anyone else in the country. ♪ with one notable exception. ♪

our because of smoking.ital. but we still had to have a cigarette. had to. but then, we were like. what are we doing? the nicodermcq patch helps prevent your urge to smoke all day. nicodermcq. you know why, we know how.

well, it is that time of year again. the time my team tries to get me to reference some viral trend or otherwise make a fool out of myself in the name of encouraging more young people to sign up for health insurance. but not this year. so this year i'm giving it to you straight. sign up for health insurance at

healthcare.gov before the deadline on december 15th. >> welcome back to "am joy." well, the deadline to sign up for obamacare for 2019 is today. in an interestingly timed surprise ruling last night, a federal judge in texas declared that the affordable care act is unconstitutional. the judge dropped his ruling just 24 hours before today's open enrollment deadline. did i mention it was today? even as donald trump says the decision is great news for america, his administration admits for now the law remains in place. obamacare is still the law of the land and open enrollment is until tonight. the texas ruling which would threaten the healthcare of morn than 20 million americans is sure to be appealed. so what happens next? joining me now is ellie and danny, tara, and andy.

andy, i want to go to you first on this. what does this ruling mean for the average american who is counting on the aca for their healthcare? >> first of all, president obama is still right. the law stays in effect and everybody should sign up for coverage. even the trump administration has said that the law will not be put into effect ritght now. one judge in texas cannot overturn this entire law. it will be interesting because i think even from a political perspective what part of this would be great if this were to pass? would it be great to see pre-existing conditions gotten rid of? i think the american public just said no. would it be great to see people under 26 kicked off their parents plans or seniors lose their doughnut hole coverage or medicaid expansion go away? these are the things that a judge in texas just said would be unconstitutional.

this will play out over the next couple of years at least. so people should take a deep breath and not worry about it for now. but this political fight has not gone away. >> absolutely. i have two kids who would lose their health coverage and be kicked off my insurance at 23 and 21. a lot of people are not thinking about it. the free screenings that everyone gets, that would be gone. republicans understand taking away healthcare is unpopular. i have to show this montage. we showed this last night. i will show it again. this is how your republican candidates ran in the recent midterms when it comes to healthcare. >> everyone agrees we're going to protect pre-existing conditions. >> i'm fighting to protect pre-existing conditions. >> i'm taking on both parties and fighting for those with pre-existing conditions. >> i want the voters to know, i'm committed to protecting people with pre-existing conditions. >> i support forcing insurance companies to protect

pre-existing conditions. >> i'm josh holly, i support forcing insurance companies to cover all pre-existing conditions. >> so if you voted for any of those people, let me -- can i show you the states involved in this lawsuit two specifically end the pre-existing conditions coverage. texas, florida. georgia. all these states, josh holly just defeated claire mccaskill having been a member of the lawsuit to get rid of your healthcare. understand that, if y'all voted for them, be clear, whatever they said in those commercials, they wanted to get rid of aca including your pre-existing conditions. >> i want to give some context. i have some unique experience here. number one, i'm currently in the process of purchasing another -- put another employee on the exchange under the affordable care act. >> as a small business person. >> as a small business owner.

i also do political consulting and my firm does healthcare marketing. people need to understand this is not just a disruption of healthcare coverage, which is bad enough on its face, it makes it harder for people like me because the disruption causes so much uncertainty in the markets that that drives up costs. >> the disruption of the ruling, even if it doesn't stand. >> even if it doesn't stand, it's on top of the ongoing sabotage that has occurred at the behest of the trump administration. so this adds to that. also people need to understand this disrupts jobs. there were whole businesses, industries that formed as a result of the affordable care act. the community outreach component that obama care required to outreach to people, to help them to understand, those people, those organizations that did that work hired people. that's one industry. a lot of those organizations have been shut down because 90% of the marketing budget has been cut by the trump administration.

a lot of those people lost jobs. that's just one industry. this has -- whether this stands or not, this has destructive effects on employment, small businesses as well as peoples lives and their healthcare. people have to understand this is bigger than just healthcare. it's tentacles in a positive way reach other things as well. >> let's me just quickly play this one. this is donald trump high-fiving, doing what he called -- spiking the ball in the end zone because your healthcare, at least one judge said is unconstitutional. as i predicted all along, obama care has been struck down as unconstitutional. will that stand? >> no. this is ais an activist, trash, illogical judicial decision. it's quequivalent to a dog taki a dump on your couch.

it's annoying. we have to clean it up. but not all couches are toilets now. >> they are to your dog. >> the bigger problem is the gop keeps nominating judges that are not house broken. this is the kind of activist judicial opinionmaking that the -- this particular guy was appointed by bush. but these are exactly the kind of idiots that trump keeps appointing throughout our federal system. as long as we allow trump and mcconnell to have free rein over our season. we'll get more of these decisions. >> if i may, i find myself playing joker to ellie's batman. i must say, the court concluded that if the tax is -- the individual mandate is no longer a tax, how can it be justified under the federal tax powers? >> he's not just saying that. he believes that that one piece being struck down means the whole law goes down.

>> that's right. like a big jenga. what does the tax have to do with free health screenings? this is one judge saying that he can go back and interpret the intent of the 2010 congress to say if one piece is gone, it's all gone. by the way, the piece already gone is that all the states have to expand medicaid. that's gone that didn't knock down the law. >> i might add that the court intended for all of these, the individual mandate to be inserverible from the rest of the act. if that's the case, you pull out one piece of the tower and the rest of the law falls. if that's the case, it's likely that roberts will say guess what? do you have to have the individual mandate back. and trump crowing about how he won actually will undo the victory that trump thinks he already has. i find it hard to believe that john roberts, who spent a lot of time and took a lot of criticism carefully saving the aca is

going to look at some random judge in texas and be like, got me. >> john roberts did server in that ruling -- here's the five, roberts joined ginsburg, sotomayor, kagan and breyer. he did in that ruling, the ruling was that you could sever that all the states could have the expansion of medicaid. you could make that optional and the law still stands. >> of course the law is severable. jonathan adler who brought some of the early cases against the aca made a statement that came out yesterday after this ruling, which basically pointed out the absurdity of the ruling and said this case should not make it anywhere near the supreme court. if it can, he suggested it won't get to two supreme court votes.

we have to deal with all of this uncertainty. i've heard this from hundreds of people. hundreds of people. >> yeah. >> now all of a sudden are needlessly uncertain. and this was a big factor in the midterm elections in 2018. >> totally. >> the trump administration could have put it behind them. what just happened with trump holy endorsing it with his tweet, he elevated healthcare again to be an issue in 2020 this is what the republican party 70 times has voted for. not repeal and replace or repeal and something else, but getting rid of the entire law, which is essentially party policy. >> let's go back to the point that republicans per what they have sued over believe that insurance companies must be allowed to charge you more if you have a pre-existing condition. it's their right to charge you more. let's just full stop that. they do believe that the

pre-existing conditions rules should be junked from aca, right? as political matter, donald trump talking about nancy and mitch getting it done. talk about the politics here of donald trump suggesting his party spend 2019 doing what the democrats spent 2009 doing, which is setting themselves on fire to do healthcare bills. healthcare bills, when you're actually passing them are incredibly unpopular. it took years for the aca to become popular because people finally realized it was healthcare. for a time they were told it was death panels. do you see the republicans in 2019 writing a whole new healthcare bill. >> i don't see that happening. i see them making some motions, throwing things out there, but i don't see them doing that. that's not their goal. the goal has always been to break the back of obamacare at any cost. one of the drivers of that -- this is why all these political issues are so interrelated.

one of the drivers is the republican donor class. at this point now you don't hear a ton of attacks on the aca coming from the base. >> their base likes it. >> you don't hear that. you do hear the republican donor class, those who don't want to cover contraception, those who don't want to have essential health benefits where you have to have a minimum set of benefits to provide people which, to me, seems like you would want to do for your employees to keep them healthy so they could continue to be good employees for you. republican donors do not want to do that. they're a corporate interest that have an outside influence on the party. that's where this push back is coming from primarily at this point in time. i do think this is an opportunity for democrats. democrats need to show them side by side running ads of them saying they'll protect pre-existing conditions and what happened now and their involvement in what happened in this decision.

>> now you'll have people like rick scott sitting there in the united states senate having run ads saying they would protect your healthcare, now being in a position to take away healthcare which is what they want to do any way. can they politically get away with that or will there be a push back? >> i think if you look at the statement from soon to be speaker nancy pelosi, the democratic party will have none of this. if there are republicans who think this is an opportunity to get a watered-down compromise passed, i don't think you will see that from the democrats. if i were mitch mcconnell this is the one thing that could probably cause me to lose the majority in 2020. the thing i cared the most about is to spend a year attacking healthcare. this is not politically good for the republicans. they may think it's what they wanted, but every time they get closer to it, they realize they're picking a wound that the american public just wants to heal. >> yeah. josh holly and rick scott, they

got six years to run out the clock. the next senate cycle is much more favorable to democrats, and i'm sure democrats will remind folks that republicanssistentlyy healthcare. we'll do this again. thank you very much. next up, the tragic story of a 7-year-old girl who died in u.s. custody. senators jeff merkley and maze hirano are down at the u.s. border. they join me next. er skin. [man 3] proof that i can fight psoriatic arthritis... [woman 4] ...with humira. [woman 5] humira targets and blocks a specific source of inflammation that contributes to both joint and skin symptoms. it's proven to help relieve pain, stop further irreversible joint damage, and clear skin in many adults. humira is the number one prescribed biologic

for psoriatic arthritis. [avo] humira can lower your ability to fight infections. serious and sometimes fatal infections, including tuberculosis, and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened, as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. [woman 6] ask your rheumatologist about humira. [woman 7] go to mypsaproof.com to see proof in action. you're in the business of helping people. we're in the business of helping you. business loans for eligible card members up to fifty thousand dollars, decided in as little as 60 seconds. the powerful backing of american express. don't do business without it.

our because of smoking.ital. but we still had to have a cigarette. had to. but then, we were like. what are we doing? the nicodermcq patch helps prevent your urge to smoke all day. nicodermcq. you know why, we know how.

it is. my heart goes out to the family, all of dhs. this is just a very sad example of the dangers of this journey. this family chose to cross illegally. what happened here was they were 90 miles away from where we could process them. they came in such a large crowd that it took our border patrol folks a couple times to get them all. we gave immediate care. we'll continue to look into the situation. again, i cannot stress how dangerous this journey is when migrants choose to come here illegally. >> the trump appears to be trying to blame the victim after a 7-year-old girl from guatemala died in custody of the u.s. border patrol. the little girl identified as

jakelin caal, she and her family turned themselves into to border patrol agents. before they were taken to a border patrol station, her father said she was ill and vomiting. she did not receive medical care up until 90 minutes later. by then she stopped breathing. jakelin was air lelifted to a hospital, then she died of shock. senators, i will start with you. senator hir ron ono, what have been told so far about how this girl died and who was

responsible >> this is why we need an inspector general report as well as an autopsy, to find out what really happened to this little girl. it's a tragic death. >> senator merkley, i know you've been to that facility, it's a camp. a prison sort of camp for children. we know some of the conditions that children are being held in. with this specific case, one issue was dehydration. we'll show some video which you probably can't see. there's video of border patrol agents dumping water on the ground, water that was meant to be left for migrants. this is from the tucson-based aid group. what do you know about whether weather is being provided to migrants when they are picked up near the border. >> i can tell you i've been assured that water is the first

priority when migrants are picked up. i don't know that's happening. that's why it's so important to have congressional oversight and hearings and pressure. the idea that anyone would turn over emergency water, which is essentially like sentencing someone to death in the desert, that would be horrendous. >> i want to read -- >> joy -- >> please, jump in. >> yes, we're here where these are all unaccompanied children. in the case of the little 7-year-old girl, she was with her father. can you imagine the thousands of unaccompanied children who are at this facility, so-called temporary facility in the middle of the desert, and they want to call it temporary so that they don't have to actually put an infrastructure that will provide water and electricity. they have their own generators.

they bring water in every single day for the kids who are here. we should not be locking these kids up at all. while their physical needs may be met here, clearly these are kids that have gone through a lot coming here on their own and their mental health needs are a concern of ours. >> what we need to drive home -- >> i think one of the things is that that's one of two federal camp sits for children. because it's on federal land, there is no -- there's zero oversight from local officials, from agencies that can make sure that the kids are getting the needs they have. i would love to follow up on what senator merkley said, the need for clear answers and oversight. right now 13,000 children are minors and in these detention camps. what is the government planning on doing? who will be held accountable? i would love to hear more on how can the american public ensure there's transparency in what's

happening with these children. >> senators? senator merkley? >> almost every conversation we have the number goes up. we're told that number is now 15,000 children. think of that. 15,000 children in child prisons. trump administration child prisons across america. they're planning to add a couple more. one at a military base here, one at an army base and another at an air force base. this is -- this system of locking children up behind the barbed wire, which maybe you all can see in the background, but this -- don't call them anything other than child prisons or interment camps. we're told there's been children who have been here three, four, five, six months long. this is to hurt children deliberately as part of a political strategy.

we need to have everyone in congress and in america rise up and say this is wrong. it has to end. >> everyone in america was horrified when the trump administration decided they should separate children from their parents, and then the chaos that followed when they were told by a judge you better reunite these children. in this facility, they are unaccompanied children. the job of health and human services which overseas this facility is to find sponsors for these children. the administration has made it harder for sponsors to come forward because many of these sponsors are undocumented and if that information is shared, which now it is, shared with i.c.e., they can undergo deportation proceedings. so not only are these kids here for longer than they should be, but the effort to find sponsors for them has been stymied. it's a chilling effect going on across the board. >> absolutely. i want to ask the senators real

quick, there's a piece of reporting which is chilling. it's making its way across social media. people are horrified about it. i want to play a bit of it hopefully the senators can hear it. take a look. >> two months ago the trump administration cut a backroom deal with the mexican government. one that is of questionable legality. that deal was to keep migrants in juarez at a center, the center we gained access to today. what you see at this center are children with their moms and their dads, with numbers written on their arms. the u.s. government told mexican authorities to assign numbers to these individuals. local groups in juarez, they made the decision to write the numbers on their arms. this is called metering. this is the slow dribs and drabs of people allowed into the united states. so people are there waiting. they're only coming across 60 people at a day. >> are you hearing these reports

of children having numbers written on their bodies, on their arms? >> it's the first time i heard about the numbers being written, but this metering strategy in which border patrol guards are put in place and turning away people. i saw this myself at ports of entries. this is in violation of u.s. law. it's in violation of international law. people have a right to assert asylum when they come to the border. the administration has been telling the world we don't want people to cross between ports of entry, we want them to come to ports of the entry. then they come to ports of endry and they're rejected on the bench and sent back to mexico. they're extremely vulnerable being sent back to mexico. >> senator merkley is describing your classic catch 22 situation.

these people are told go to the border crossing. when they go there and they have gone through a dangerous journey, they're told, so sorry, no room. as to the numbers being written down, it goes to show the administration's attitude towards immigrants. they're not human beings. we're dealing with human beings. we're dealing with young children. that's something this administration needs to get across. this is what the people of our country need to understand. these are human beings who want to have a chance at a better life in our country. we should give them that chance. that's the law. >> i wanted to play one more piece of sound. you can respond to the numbers being written on children's arms, which is pretty shocking to look at. i want to play you hogan gidley, pretty good guy working for the administration. here he is responding to this death of this little girl.

take a listen. >> it's a sad time but it's also senseless. it's a needless death. it's 100% preventable if we could come together and pass some commonsense laws to disincentivize people coming up from the border and encourage them to do it the right way, the legal way, then those types of deaths, those types of assaults, those types of rapes, human smuggling, that would come to an end. >> it's tough to see somebody that you know speaking in this way, toeing the line. what do you make of the seemingly callousness of the way the administration is responding to the death of this little girl? >> secretary neilsen is basically saying it's nobody's fault but that of the person trying to make desperate choices during desperate times.

she and the president created this directive. they're closing ports of entry. they're basically telling people that they have to turn back because the country is full. they're tear gassing families as they are trying to do it the right way. so they are forcing these individuals to seek and come into our border. so when secretary neilsen is saying that there's no other way, she is not levels with the american people. most other administrations, they have allowed team to cross legally and then they provide people with ankle bracelets so they can come back and hear their fair day in court. let the courts decide. this is nonsense. this is fodder for the base. unfortunately it's harming individuals. i would love to know what we can expect from a new congress. >> senators, will there be hearings on this? there's been a statement from nancy pelosi on this.

we can expect the house to take action and hearings, but the senate is still controlled by the president's party. in your view, senators, will there be hearings on this in the senate? >> both of us have called for such hearings. my hope is that when the house comes under democratic control there will be checks and balances. there will be hopefully hearings and that will put pressure on the senate to do something also. >> it's a shame. it's unacceptable that the republican leadership has not held hearings in the senate or in the house at this point. represent e republicans have been okay with this horrific infliction of tragedy on children. colleagues have come up to me and said i really don't like what's going on. i say can you stand up publicly?

they say maybe i can whisper to some of trump's staff. that's not enough. we need to stand together and say people need to be treated with respected and decency as they await their asylum hearings. >> mazie hirono and jeff merkley, thank you very much. more "am joy" after the break. as a fitness junkie, i customize everything - bike, wheels, saddle. that's why i switched to liberty mutual. they customized my insurance, so i only pay for what i need. i insured my car, and my bike.

my calves are custom too, but i can't insure those... which is a crying shame. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ our because of smoking.ital. but we still had to have a cigarette. had to. but then, we were like. what are we doing? the nicodermcq patch helps prevent your urge to smoke all day. nicodermcq. you know why, we know how. ♪ when i first came to ocean bay, what i saw was despair. i knew something had to be done. hurricane sandy really woke people up, to showing that we need to invest in this community. i knew having the right partner we could turn this place around. it was only one bank that could finance a project this difficult and this large, and that was citi.

preserving affordable housing preserves communities. so we are doing their kitchens and their flooring and their lobbies and the grounds. and the beautification of their homes, giving them pride in where they live, will make this a thriving community once again. ♪ bring all the gifts for under the tree and while you're at it... bring the tree. ford f-150 best-in-class payload. best-in-class towing. built for the holidays.

bring home the f-150 with zero percent financing for 72 months. only at your ford dealer.

coming up, trump acsked everyone he knows and they all said no. we'll tell you who finally said yes to being chief of staff. (old man vo) nearly two million meals delivered. (mom vo) over eighteen hundred wishes granted. (vo) that's one hundred and forty million dollars donated to charity by subaru and its retailers over eleven years. (girl) thank you. (boy) thank you. (old man) thank you. (granddaughter) thank you. (honking) when your craving strikes,

you need your wing nut. ( ♪ ) no one can totally satisfy a craving, quite like your wing nut.

the united states postal service no one can totally satisfy a craving, makes more holiday deliveries to homes than anyone else in the country. ♪ with one notable exception. ♪

>> a lot of people want the job. a lot of people want the job. i have some great people. a lot of friends of mine want it. a lot of people chuck and nancy know very well want it. a lot of people you like. a lot of people want the job of chief of staff. we'll see what happens very soon. we're in no rush. >> no. no. no, that's not true. that's not true. after multiple candidates turned down the job, including mike pence's former chief of staff, former new jersey governor chris christie, at least for now it looks like the job belongs to mick mulvaney. several names were floated for the role including steve mnuchin, trump's son-in-law. so what difference will mulvaney make? let's start with you, david. trump tried to claim that everyone wanted the job.

no one wanted the job. mick mulvaney already has 18 jobs in the trump administration, so now he has to do this, too. what difference will that make? >> i heard that even dennis rodman turned trump down for the job. and also apparently mick mulvaney teaches at arthur murray studios on the weekend. he will be unavailable saturday and sunday. >> tiffany cross suggested kanye west. >> that would be like having newt. which almost happened, too. you know, i think we look for comic relief because there's so much tragedy and sadness in this administration. whether it's the decision about the aca, whether it's the ongoing refusal to come to term with the russian scandal, trump's detrail betrayal of ame. we say, y inde shgs yshg, yes, mounting a reality show.

saying everybody wants this. it's nutty. at this point it doesn't matter who the chief of staff is. it really doesn't matter. trump will do whatever the heck he wants. ivanka and jared will do what they want. it will be this terrible infighting and craziness. he cannot be tamed because he doesn't want to be tamed. >> the guy who has taken the job is not exactly somebody who in the past has been a fan of donald trump. here he is talking about donald trump in 2016. >> you stole my words. >> let's play it. >> yes, i'm supporting donald trump. i'm doing so as enthusiastically as i can even i think he's a terrible human being. >> the reason he wanted to be acting is so he could have a safe exit. >> please. >> mick mulvaney is not a fan of the american people period. in 2013 he was part of the freedom caucus, he doubled down

trying to shut down the government effectively because he didn't want obama kacare fore majority of the american people. he also gutted the consumer protection bureau, the bureau put in place to protect people against wall street. it's not like he's a good dude. not necessarily a fine dude, but he also recognizes that trump is a terrible person. that's going to be anreconcile. >> now he's really going to find out. >> right. david, jonathan allen was on the air yesterday saying mick mulvaney is not exactly a popular fellow. he is the co-founder of the tea party, but he's not really liked on capitol hill. how will he help? >> he's not well liked on capitol hill and not well liked by the democrats. the thing is, you know, what is about to hit the trump white house, the real key job is not the chief of staff but the white

house counsel. they got a new one two weeks ago. they have four or five lawyers in the office, when they literally need several dozen. they'll get all these information rerequests, perhaps subpoenas about investigations that will be coming down. i don't think mick mulvaney will be the type of person that will deal not well with jerry nadler, elijah cummings and adam schiff who will have serious questions for the president. >> i can picture nancy pelosi walking out in that olivia pope coat. i don't know him. can i play newt gingrich? this is newt gingrich, donald trump super fan. here's newt gingrich on whether or not he wanted the job. >> we went to the white house yesterday to see the decorati decorations. we wanted to see what melania had done. several reporters saw us and that jumped to oh, are you being

interviewed? no, i was wandering around looking at decorations. >> so you were a tourist? >> i was there as an american citizen looking at one of the most famous of american buildings. >> he just wanted to see the red christmas trees. >> you can't distance yourself more from that. i just happen to be american. happened to be in washington. i rang that doorbell to see if i can see the christmas trees. look at the short list he had. chris christie. he had newt gingrich. he ended up on mulvaney, again on the record he says he is not a good guy. that speaks volumes to the president and recognizing that he is not -- mulvaney himself, he's not politically deft in the inner workings of congress. that's going to be an incredible challenge as indictments and hearings come down the pipeline. that's probably why john kelly wanted to get the heck out of there. he knows what's coming down the pipeline. >> on a more serious note,

anyone coming into this administration has to have enough money to lawyer up. as soon as you get a job there you have to hire an attorney. >> part of the job is mimaginin the people who left, what they will talk about in front of congress. court fights. ryan zinke is racing out of dodge ahead of the posse. you can't touch me. i'm not here anymore. actually you can. they can go back. this is not going to give you a get out of jail free card. so this is really the next two years. it's going to be political warfare. while the democrats try to pass bills on prescription drug care, voting rights, protecting obama care, i just don't know what mick mulvaney wants out of this. i mean, he'd be better off sticking with his numbers and emasculating the consumer financial protection board. that would be so much easier than dealing with trump and the democratic congress. >> very quickly before we go,

david. now donald trump also wants congress to pass a brand-new healthcare bill. will that happen? >> no. they're not going to pass a brand-new healthcare bill. this will, i think, move quickly on prescription drug prices, try to do something about that. if they pass anything, it will be trying to protect the aca, obamacare. it's not going to be what trump wants. it certainly won't be trumpcare. >> lastly, what about this whole negotiation which is what chuck and nancy ate donald trump's lunch on, the wall. is that -- that's not going to happen, right? >> i think right now that's dead on arrival. i think that david hit the nail on the head. the democrats cannot live in hubris. they not only have to make sure they're testing and making sure there are congressional hearings and oversight hearings on the president, but they have to find policies that pass through congress. that's what the american people sent them to congress to do, to

do their job. >> always great to talk to you guys. thank you very much. >> thank you. next up, donald trump's secrets are no longer being hidden by the national enquirer. we'll talk with a former employee next. before we go, a look at christmas at the white house. ♪ be right back. with moderate to severe crohn's disease, i was there, just not always where i needed to be. is she alright? i hope so. so i talked to my doctor about humira. i learned humira is for people who still have symptoms of crohn's disease after trying other medications. and the majority of people on humira saw significant symptom relief and many achieved remission in as little as 4 weeks. humira can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened; as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure.

before treatment, get tested for tb. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common, and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. be there for you, and them. ask your gastroenterologist about humira. with humira, remission is possible. our because of smoking.ital. but we still had to have a cigarette. had to. but then, we were like. what are we doing? the nicodermcq patch helps prevent your urge to smoke all day. nicodermcq. you know why, we know how.

so shark invented duo clean. while deep cleaning carpets, the added soft brush roll picks up large particles, gives floors a polished look, and fearlessly devours piles. duo clean technology, corded and cord-free.

did you know about the payments? >> later on i knew, later on. >> sex, lies and tab lloyds. nbc news has confirmed that president trump was in the room during a discussion of the hush payments. also in the room michael cohen, along with david pecker, all discussing ways that pecker could help navy gait the payments. let's talk about this relationship between donald trump and mr. pecker. how far back does that relationship go? >> david pecker and donald trump go back many years, more than 20 years, socially and later when

david assumed the mantle at american media, their friendship became even closer. >> according to a non-prosecution agreement that nbc news obtained on tuesday, as part of that agreement disclosed on wednesday, america media inc. admitted that pecker offered to help deal with negative stories about the candidate's relationship with women's, so they could be purchased. we know that mike at cohen arranged two such payments as well -- but according to the book "fire and fury" if you can think back to the michael wolfe book, there were hundreds of women. marked ko the book, kasowitz has gotten him out of the all kinds

of jams. is there any evidence, to your knowledge, that the enquirer hushed up dozens, maybe hundreds? >> you know, certainly, you know, david pecker kept a pretty long inventory of president trump's foibles, romances, infidelities. donald trump led a pretty reckless life for someone that ultimately was going to be elected president. i think looking back, probably president trump's biggest regret was accepting donald trump's offer to help pave the way to the white house. >> there was a relationship with jared kushner, too, with pecker, and it seemed like they were producing glossy magazines for the saudis. what are all these relationships about? they seem to stretch to the

middle east as well. >> well, you know, the special counsel's focus on russia is tying up. in the new year, they are going to begin focusing on the middle east, and specifically saudi arabia. david pecker has at least three ties to the saudi government, and god only knows what, you know, screwed any of those relationships is going to provide. >> how surprising is it, as someone who worked for "the enquirer" that david pecker took a deal and broke from him? >> i think, you know, that while they profess to be great friends, when push comes to shove, david pecker had to worry about his own skin and his own culpability. given the options, he frankly,

he know, broke his ties with donald trump as soon as the prospect of severe penalties were proposed. >> we know requesting the enquirer" on occasion have actually broken material. the john edwards case, they found out about his mistress. there were running stories on dirt with trump's perceived enemies. will we find out more about that? >> if you find out story by story, the genesis of each of those stories on president trump's rivals, i think you'll find the strings go back to the trump organization. the story leads themselves were proposed by people within the trump oralization. >> so they were pitching these stories and then running at donald trump's organization's behest? >> exactly. the thing that did concentrate the mind of mr. pecker, here is michael cohen on abc news on friday. >> if they want me, i'm here and

willing to answer whatever additional questions they may have for me. i will spend the rest of my life in order to fix the mistake i made. >> is david pecker going to tell more tales on donald trump? >> i wouldn't doubt it. i think as this is playing it out, it tests the loyalty of donald trump's close friends. >> loyalty only extends until an indictment is staring you in the face. jerry george, thank you so much. >> my pleasure. thank you. at the top of the hour, reaction to the news that embattled interior secretary ryan zinke is leaving. rate to se plaque psoriasis. with tremfya®, you can get clearer. and stay clearer. in fact, most patients who saw 90% clearer skin at 28 weeks stayed clearer through 48 weeks. tremfya® works better than humira® at providing clearer skin, and more patients were symptom free with tremfya®. tremfya® may lower your ability to fight infections and may increase your risk of infections. before treatment, your doctor should check you

for infections and tuberculosis. tell your doctor if you have an infection or have symptoms such as: fever, sweats, chills, muscle aches or cough. before starting tremfya® tell your doctor if you plan to or have recently received a vaccine. ask your doctor about tremfya®. tremfya®. because you deserve to stay clearer. janssen wants to help you explore cost support options. discover.o. i like your card, but i'm absolutely not paying an annual fee. discover has no annual fees. really? yeah. we just don't believe in them. oh nice. you would not believe how long i've been rehearsing that. no annual fee on any card. only from discover.

our because of smoking.ital. but we still had to have a cigarette. had to. but then, we were like. what are we doing? the nicodermcq patch helps prevent your urge to smoke all day. nicodermcq. you know why, we know how. i but i can tell you i liberty mutual customized my car insurance so i only pay for what i need. oh no, no, no, no, no, no, no... only pay for what you need.

♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪

that's our show for today. alex has the latest. i missed you. >> okay. i was actually going after you, like who gave you approval for two weekends off? i'm going through my soul sister withdrawals. >> but i saw a giraffe. i tried to bring it back, but it wouldn't fit in my bag. >> okay. yeah, that would have been rather awkward in the studio. >> i missed you. have a great show.