♪ [ dobaxter.ng ] it's bedtime. peace of mind should never be out of reach. [ voice command beep ] xfinity home. xfinity home connects you to total home security you can control from anywhere on any device. and it protects you with 24/7 professional monitoring. i guess we're sleeping here tonight. xfinity home. simple. easy. awesome. call, go online or demo in an xfinity store today.

i want this to end. it's got to end now. this plan solves the immediate crises. >> the art of this deal appears dead on arrival. both ends of the political spectrum giving the dreamers' wall offer a thumbs down but where's the hope for an end to the shutdown. and on the russia probe, new revelations from rudy giuliani about that moscow project that may not exactly help the president's cause one little bit. >> the conversations lasted throughout parts of 2016. yeah, probably up to -- could be up to as far as october, november. >> that is news to me, and that is big news. >> good day, everyone. from msnbc world headquarters in new york, welcome to "weekends with alex witt." happening right now, the white house and members of congress heading to another round in the political 'em pass that shut

down the government for the last 30 days with no end in sight. a forceful and unequivocal no from democrats rejecting president trump's new offer to end the shutdown, the president insisting on $5.7 billion for a border wall. in exchange he'll left the threat of deportation for 1 million immigrants, including 700,000 brought to the u.s. as children, at least temporarily. if the government is not funded by tuesday, 800,000 federal workers will miss their second paycheck on friday. democrats hoping for an opening in the negotiations. >> the vice president and president know that what the president announced yesterday was not going to go anywhere. it wasn't really intended to. it was a -- i think an effort to prop up the president's sagging poll numbers. >> we would love to have a permanent fix for daca and tps just as he wants a permanent wall. >> republicans trying to assuage concerns from hard line anti-immigration voices who are denouncing the president's offer

as amnesty. >> this is not amnesty. there's no pathway to citizenship. there's no -- there's no permanent status here at all. >> it isn't amnesty and frankly, it is a really important step forward. speaker pelosi has said that she will be a champion of the dreamers and so when she's willing to play games, when she's willing to pull political stunts but she's not actually willing to come up with actual solutions, that makes it difficult to come up with an agreement here. president trump's attorney, rudy giuliani, telling abc news that negotiations to develop a trump tower in moscow extended beyond previously known dates and that includes while candidate trump was publicly denying he had any business interests in russia. >> it's our understanding that they went on throughout 2016. there weren't a lot of them but there were conversations. can't be sure of the exact date. probably up to -- could be up to as far as october, november.

any time during that period they could have talked about it but the president's recollection of it is that the thing had petered out quite a bit. >> the vice chair of the house intelligence committee vowing to investigate. >> that is news to me, and that is big news. most voters, democrat, republican, independent, you name it, knowing that the republican nominee was actively trying to do business in moscow and those negotiations were ongoing up until the election, i think that's a relevant fact for voters to know. >> nbc's jeff bennett is joining me from the white house. welcome, my friend. we've got two big headlines from the president's attorney. how big a deal are they? >> reporter: you know, it's hard to tell, but let's start with the bit about the russia tower because rudy giuliani, as we just saw there today, acknowledged to our own chuck todd that conversations between the trump organization and

russia continued up through 2016 election so this really fits a pattern, alex, of the president and his allies shifting the goal post about these dealings with russia, shifting from president trump saying he has nothing to do with russia at all to ultimately acknowledging that, yes, his company did try to strike a deal to build a tower in moscow. two things about this are important. first, we know that donald trump even as the gop nominee was having these talks with russia even though russia, as we know, is a geopolitical foe. the second thing that's important to know is that the fbi in the summer of 2016 briefed both hillary clinton and donald trump and their campaigns about the counter intelligence threat posed by russia, and yet, it now appears that the trump organization continued forward with these talks. so that's that, but now let's move on to this bit about michael cohen because in light of that disputed buzzfeed story that president trump told michael cohen to lie to congress, rudy giuliani now says

he doesn't know for sure if trump talked with cohen about his congressional testimony, but that if he did, it's not that big of a deal. here's what he said. >> are you 100% confident that the president never once asked michael cohen to do anything but tell the truth to congress? >> 100% certain of that. categorically i can tell you, his counsel to michael cohen was tell the truth. he certainly had no discussions in which he told him or counselled him to lie. if he had any discussions with him, they would be about the version of the events that michael cohen gave then which they all believe was true. >> you just acknowledged that it's possible that president trump talked to michael cohen about his testimony. >> which would be perfectly normal, which the president believed was true. >> so it's possible that that happened? >> i don't know if it happened or didn't happen. it might be attorney/client privilege where i can't acknowledge it but i have no knowledge that he spoke to him.

>> reporter: i don't know about you but that seems like a contradiction to me. rudy giuliani on the one hand saying donald trump kouncounsel michael cohen to tell the truth, on the other hand he doesn't know at all. rudy giuliani saying a lot about a lot but not offering much in the way of clarity. alex. >> perfectly said. i was like, wait, i'm trying to make heads or tails of all this. i'm going to go to my guests. pamela levy and jeff jones, white house correspondent for reuters. welcome to you both. jeff, you now have an on-the-record statement from the president's lawyer, although you must decipher through a lot to get to it but the says that the president did not direct michael cohen to lie. how significant is that? >> well, that's certainly his position and that's the white house's position too. you see that they were very grateful that the special counsel came out with its statement, its unusual statement disputing that buzzfeed story. but as our colleague jeff just

pointed out, rudy giuliani in his interviews this morning also sort of muddied the waters a little bit on whether or not the president had an interaction or a conversation with michael cohen before that testimony. so that raises questions in and of itself. but their position is that if they did speak, it wasn't a direction to lie and of course giuliani and others around president trump and president trump himself have done a great deal of effort to try and discredit cohen all together. >> look, this is the attorney for the president of the united states, but giuliani tends to contradict himself left and right so what do you make of people and their take on all this? can you take his comments at face value? >> i certainly don't. i think we've seen giuliani himself move the goal post. i think he says what he needs to say in the moment and i think that there's -- the president is grateful that he is at least out there saying something, that we can get some sort of feedback from the white house.

but look, he changes his story. i think by his own admission he wasn't there at the time. i also don't think that he -- he has to represent what he's told or hopefully he represents what he's told, but we have no indication that what he's being told is the truth either. honestly, i don't put much stock in this and i think it's actually really telling that in these comments this morning giuliani really opened the door to a lot of stuff that could have happened and that now the president is going to have to rush in and try and figure out. >> interestingly, jeff, he also put a new timeline on the moscow hotel talks. is this the first time we're hearing of this? what's your read on it? >> there have been previous reports that these discussions were continuing through a good chink chunk of 2016 but the fact that the president's lawyer, rudy giuliani, is saying that this could have gone all the way until october or november suggests that these talks were going on up to the time that president trump was elected. this is coming as well when we

know that -- about the threat that russia posed to the election. we know that the president has downplayed that and called the investigation into all of this a witch hunt. so it's just another piece of information suggesting that there were ties of some kind. >> and i just want to be clear, pema, this would have taken place if it goes all the way up to, say, election day, the beginning of november. after the president in august was spoken to by the fbi about potential russian election interference, correct? >> absolutely. look, we're talking a lot these days about this buzzfeed article. we're not totally sure if it was true. the special counsel has come out and basically said they think it's inaccurate, but there are some things in that article that i think were missing and that if true are really important. one of them is that this project trump believed would be worth in excess of $300 million. so when you're looking at something like that, you're looking over the course of the

campaign a candidate who repeatedly went out of his way to defend russia and despite the briefings that we were talking about here, russia had over him $300 million projects, something -- an enormous amount of money, and they could continue to dangle that over him throughout the election. that's a huge problem. >> yeah. okay, guys, i want to talk shutdown with you in just a moment but not before we go right now to mike va cara who's joining us from capitol hill to get his take on the very latest there. is there any hope there in the halls of congress, mike? >> reporter: well, it's kind of quiet around here. congress is gone. they're not coming back until tuesday and that is going to be a significant day. first of all, they weren't supposed to be here next week at all. they were going to take off for the marlin luther king obser observanc observances. as soon as the president finished, they hit send on the blast e-mail, mitch mcconnell

promising to bring the president's proposal to the senate floor. that in and of itself is new, to have mitch mcconnell who had been trying to stay out of this to step forward now and promise to do that. one problem, he's unlikely to get the 60 of 100 senators he's going to need to even get on the bill, to start debating the bill on the floor of the senate. so that may not work for them, but that yet may clarify things even in failure. so there's always hope, i guess. jeff earlier was talking about this is sunday, a day of rest for some people, but president trump working his fingers to the bone on the twitter machine. he's sending them out rapid fire now, mostly directed at nancy pelosi, his main foil here. in one of them he says nancy pelosi and the democrats turned down my offer yesterday before i even got to speak. in the next one he calls her a radical democrat. and by the way, clean up the streets in san francisco. they're disgusting, the president says. finally, nancy, i'm thinking about the state of the union speech.

there are so many options. of course, nancy pelosi suggested that he shouldn't come because of the security situation during the shutdown. the president concludes with, while a contract is a contract, i'll get back to you soon. so we don't know how that's going to play out. we don't know if we're going to be standing and reporting on the state of the union on january 29th or if we will be at all. for the record, the speaker's spokesman said, the speaker never received a written, quote, unquote, acceptance from the president. the two sides still going at each other, even with the president's white house diplomatic room speech to the nation yesterday speaking directly to the camera in a formal environment trying to put forward this proposal. the democrats are simply saying it's a trade that is not worth it. he wants a temporary daca fix, a temporary tps fix in exchange for a permanent wall. that they think is a sucker punch and they're not going for it. >> i'm looking through these

tweets and i think we're this close to getting an unflattering nickname for nancy pelosi from the president. thank you very much from capitol hill. i'm not going to ask you guys to comment on the twitter nicknames that the president has but i want to play what democratic senator kirsten gillibrand said this morning. here's that. >> we put a deal on the table a year ago to say we will give you the border security money that you want, we will let you start doing the things you want to do but you must protect all the dreamers. that was something we were willing to talk about. that is still there for him. >> is it still there, jeff? i mean, is this something that the president could potentially get behind even though he shut it down last year? is it a legitimate possibility? >> i think you also have to ask the question is the senator speaking for all democrats there? she's just announced that she's potentially running for president or looking at that very seriously, but you know, the democrats have made their position in the last few weeks

during this shutdown very clear and that is, a, they don't want a wall. nancy pelosi who is the top democrat now in the party as the speaker of the house saying that it is immoral. and in general, interested in doing something on daca for sure but not until the government is re-opened. it's interesting that the senator brought that up and i'm sure that people in the white house will be studying that or considering that, but whether or not she speaks for the people who are doing the negotiating, i'm not sure that's clear. >> there's an interesting op-ed headline in esquire which reads like this, there is no more loathsome creature walking our political landscape than mitch mcconnell. is that an exaggeration? is there a reality base to that? >> yeah, look, there are enough votes in the senate to open up the government, but he won't call a vote. so absolutely. the house has voted on this. they're going to continue to vote on this. the senate hasn't taken this vote. you know, look, i think what he says is, i don't want to vote on

something that the president will veto, but ultimately congress can override that veto. when you're talking about opening the government, the senate has a rule. so i think that there's going to be increasing pressure on the senate to take up these bills and put pressure on the president and go ahead and try to open the government. certainly mitch mcconnell doesn't want to do that. he wants to stay in lock step with the president. he is up for re-election in two years. he doesn't want to anger the base of his party which is very much aligned with trump, so he's in a very difficult spot. but i think basically what trump did yesterday was he tried to pretend that republicans are the ones who are open to negotiating here and i think you saw some republican senators going with that, saying, look, now we've made an overture and now democrats have to come back. i think he tried to buy the senate some time with that. >> to that point, jeff, do you think that the president

succeeded in shifting public pressure onto the democrats yesterday? >> i think it's too early to say if he succeeded. he certainly tried, and i think he will be able to say and republicans will be able to say, look, now the ball is in your court. but the democrats came out pretty swiftly to say this is not acceptable. it is, however, pretty interesting if mitch mcconnell does bring this up on the floor and gets a vote if they are successful in getting that passed through the senate and there are question marks about whether he would be successful in doing that but if he is, then it really does go into nancy pelosi's hands because then the bill would be sent to the house. >> all right, pema, jeff, awfully good to talk with both of you guys. thank you so much. there's more to discuss on the border wall that may make you wonder why the government is still shut down. l shut down. l shut down. and saying, "really?" so capital one is building something completely new. capital one cafes. inviting places with people here to help you, not sell you. and savings and checking accounts with

no fees or minimums. because that's how it should be. you can open one from right here or anywhere in 5 minutes. seriously, 5 minutes... this is banking reimagined. what's in your wallet? tailored recommendations, tax-efficient investing strategies, and a dedicated advisor to help you grow and protect your wealth. fidelity wealth management.

to help you grow and protect your wealth. let you sleep, try new nyquil severe with vicks vapocool. (acapella) whoa! (avo) and vaporize it. (acapella) ahhhh! (acapella) shhhh! (avo) new nyquil severe with vicks vapocool. the vaporizing, nighttime, coughing, aching, stuffy head, best sleep with a cold, medicine.

so you wouldn't rule out a wall? >> i would not rule out a wall in certain instances. now, the notion that we can't have barriers is just something that's not true. clearly democrats are for border security but we are not for this constantly moving the ball just for a talking point. >> that was the chair of the house homeland security committee, democrat bennie thompson today. joining me now, representative john gare mendy, a democrat from california and a very good friend to us here on msnbc.

recently you said you are also not opposed to some kind of wall in some parts of the border. so tell me what this stalemate is really about. >> this is about the president and the president's base. you go back -- just take a look at this last year. the congress of the united states was willing to appropriate $1.6 billion for border security. that was in the legislation. that was available through the continuing resolution for both november and then it was extended to december, $1.6 billion for border security. and then at the final -- then there was this little meeting in the oval office with the leadership and the president said i want $5 billion or else i'm going to shut down the government. well, that was back in december and guess what? he didn't get his $5 billion and he did shut down the government. i will tell you this, i'm on the transportation committee where we fund transportation projects. we fund military projects.

i'm on that. and we wouldn't fund a warehouse unless we knew precisely where it was going to go, what it was going to cost, and why it was necessary. we're not about to give the president a $5 billion or a $5.7 billion slush fund so that he can carry out his campaign promise. >> well look -- >> in reality -- >> there are polls out there, i'm sure you've seen them, and it shows that most americans are blaming president trump for the shutdown, but neither side now seems to hold a monopoly over asserting a moral high ground here. are you at all concerned that by not supporting the president's offer you may be seen, as in the democrats, not you personally, as being as politically motivated as the president? >> not at all. to suggest that the president has the moral high ground on anything is absolutely ridiculous. this is a man that lies when he gets up in the morning with his first tweet and lies when he's going to bed at night. moral high ground is not associated with trump. now, the reality is that we

can -- he is holding -- the reality is that he is holding 800,000 federal employees hostage. he's holding this nation hostage for a political promise that he made back during the campaign. ann coulter and others are holding him hostage to that political process. we can start the government right now. one department, just one department, the department of homeland security has the border issue. all of the other departments, the department of justice, the transportation department, the department of interior, national parks and wildlife refuge, the epa, all of these are being held hostage for what? for a political promise. >> hostage and also i'm looking at a recent internal e-mail as saying that the tsa is acknowledging that they're having incredible sickouts, way more than they usually do.

on this day, 8% of tsa agents have called out as compared to 6 last year but who can blame them? they may be emotionally racked at this point after 30 days without pay. jfk, laguardia, newark, miami, atlanta, bwi, houston, all over this country americans, the average american is feeling, but what i want to know is what happened last spring because democrats were willing to give $25 billion for a border wall in exchange for a path to citizenship for the dreamers. what has changed? >> what has changed is that the president has totally rejected any permanent solution, any real solution to the dreamers and to the temporary protected status folks. the reality is this particular problem of the dreamers was created by president trump. there was a solution in hand when he came into office because obama had put in place a

temporary solution that would have gone on for some time for those dreamers who came here as an early child and had created no problem and were in school. trump created a problem by terminating that program. he also created a problem for the tsb, the temporary protected status folks, which he revoked their opportunity to stay here during -- when they were at harm back in their country. all of these problems were created by the president. now going forward he's created a problem not just for the 800,000 federal employees who are about to miss their second paycheck but also for america, the american economy is hurt by this. >> what are your constituents telling you? do they at all say they want you to compromise and cave? >> we're ready to compromise. we want the government opened. mr. president, let's open the government. this issue is in the department of homeland security. take 28 days, take 38, 40 days,

fund that, and then let's continue the negotiations for that department while we open up the rest of government, while we provide the services for the people that travel at all of those airports. >> i'm trying to play negotiator here. where is the room for compromise because in the president's mind you've got to imagine that only some more money for his wall is how he might be able to be brought to the negotiating table. >> well, i will tell that you i wouldn't appropriate a nickel for a wall that i didn't know where it was, where i didn't know what purpose it would serve, how it would protect america, than just some sort of a campaign slogan. why is there a problem in a particular sector? why do you need a wall there? and then most of the problem, 80% to 90% of the drugs come into this country through the legal ports of entry. one out of five cars is checked.

what about those four that came through? those are where the drugs are. what about the airplanes? what about the trains, the containers that come through? that's where we need to focus our attention. and if the president thinks that a wall is absolutely necessary in a particular sector, then tell us why, tell us how that wall is going to solve that problem and what's it going to cost. we require that for the most mundane of federal projects, an airport, a hangar, at any military facility. we require that before we would give them a nickel. >> sounds like you want the president to get specific. >> absolutely. >> sir, it's always good to talk to you. thank you for sharing your insights. >> thank you. was it perfectly normal for president trump to talk to michael cohen before testifying on capitol hill? new legal questions shroud the president and his former fixer. r if you have moderate to severe

psoriasis or psoriatic arthritis, 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 differently. for psoriasis, 75% clearer skin is achievable, with reduced redness, thickness, and scaliness of plaques. for psoriatic arthritis, otezla is proven to reduce joint swelling, tenderness, and pain. and the otezla prescribing information has no requirement for routine lab monitoring. don't use if you're allergic to otezla. it may cause severe diarrhea, nausea, or vomiting. 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. upper respiratory tract infection and headache may occur. tell your doctor about your medicines and if you're pregnant or planning to be.

otezla. show more of you. and i don't add trup the years.s. but what i do count on... is boost® delicious boost® high protein nutritional drink has 20 grams of protein, along with 26 essential vitamins and minerals. boost® high protein. be up for life. we know that when you're spending time with the grandkids every minute counts. and you don't have time for a cracked windshield. that's why we show you exactly when we'll be there. saving you time, so you can keep saving the world. >> kids: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace ♪

there's brushing...and there's oral-b power brushing. oral-b just cleans better. even my hygienist said going electric could lead to way cleaner teeth. and unlike sonicare, oral-b is the first electric toothbrush brand accepted by the ada. oral-b. brush like a pro.

amazon prime video so when you say words like... show me best of prime video into this... you'll see awesome stuff like this. discover prime originals like the emmy-winning the marvelous mrs. maisel... tom clancy's jack ryan... and the man in the high castle. all in the same place as your live tv. its all included with your amazon prime membership. that's how xfinity makes tv... simple. easy. awesome. new details today from the president's lawyer, rudy giuliani, who says discussions of a trump tower in moscow were active as late as november 2016. take a listen. >> it's our understanding that they went on throughout 2016. there weren't a lot of them but there were conversations. can't be sure of the exact date,

but the president can remember having conversations with him about it. probably up to -- could be up to as far as october, november. let's just cover until the election, so any time during that period they could have talked about it. >> as far as the president was concerned, an active project until at least october, november of 2016, an active potential deal? >> yeah, i would say an active proposal. >> joining me now, former assistant watergate special prosecutor jill winebanks. you just heard giuliani confirming that the negotiations lasted until november 2016. so, i want to play with what msnbc contributor natasha better trand points out. if true, trump was secretly trying to strike a deal with moscow even after the fbi warned him of the counter intelligence threat posed by russia. so does this matter legally speaking? >> i think it does. it also should matter to all the

voters which is probably more important because it's absolute proof of his knowledge that he was being compromised or could be compromised, and that he ignored it. he kept on talking to them. there's a lot of evidence that he was aware of the conversations going on between the russian government and his organization for the trump tower in moscow. >> so giuliani also says that trump may have spoken to cohen about his testimony beforehand. take a listen to this. >> you just acknowledged that it's possible that president trump talked to michael cohen about his testimony. >> which would be perfectly normal. >> is that perfectly normal? is this as innocent as giuliani is making it appear? should this be investigated on whether or not this is obstruction? >> yes, it should be. as a prosecutor, i can tell you -- or as a defense lawyer which i've done that too, i would never have somebody who is the potential subject of an

obstruction talking to the witnesses who might be testifying against that person. it obviously looks like obstruction. it looks like witness intimidation, as does many more recent things like -- well, let's look at cohen's father-in-law. that's a direct threat to him. it's intended to intimidate him against testifying and justifies why michael cohen is saying his family is in danger. >> okay, how about "the washington post" report that mueller's statement meant to dispute the whole report put out there by buzzfeed as being inaccurate and, quote, that the deputy attorney general's office called to inquire if the special counsel planned any kind of response. what does mueller's office publicly disputing a report on an ongoing investigation and that rod rosenstein's inquiry, what does that tell you about the severity of this report? >> well, the buzzfeed report was obviously dynamite. it read very much like a direct

accusation of the president being involved in a felony, a subornation of perjury, telling someone to lie. that is a crime that no one can defend against, unlike i fired comey because i had the authority to do so. this was indefensible. the fact that the prosecutor's comments were parsed in very careful language makes me think that it wasn't saying that the president didn't tell cohen to lie to the congress but that there may be something wrong with some of the details. on the other hand, it sort of doesn't make sense why you would correct a detailed part of the sentence instead of the whole thing. >> why you wouldn't get specific. >> exactly. >> is that just because it reflects the way that mueller and his team have gone about everything? listen, it's been tighter than fort knox with that group. >> yes. and it's a very dangerous slope they're now on. having commented on something like this, what happens when the

next explosive report comes out from any news source? will they comment again, and if they don't, will it be assumed that it's absolutely, 100% accurate? that's a danger. >> can we take that with hindsight being 2020, does that also mean that everything that has been reported about the investigation, about how they are managing things is true because they've been silent and they haven't commented on it? >> that is part of the danger of the slippery slope. having done this, what does it mean in terms of the past. it's what got comey in trouble. once you say something, if it changes, you have to comment on it. i think it was a very unfortunate thing that they commented and the only thing i can think of is, one, they were trying to say we aren't the leak, but they should have maybe just said that. they may have also been just saying this one is really exploding and the conversations now are getting very serious about impeachment so hold off until we get the facts out. i think we all need to take a

deep breath and wait until there's some public education going on. i think hearings by the congress are really essential to public education. i can compare it to what happened in watergate. we had the senate hearings that let people see john dean in person, let them evaluate his credibility. they heard the accusations about hush money. they heard the accusations about dangling pardons. so that's what we need to hear here too. >> jill wine-banks, we always seem to hear from you too. thank you so much. >> thank you. the government shutdown could be taking a political toll on the president but will sagging poll numbers make him give up on the wall? sagging poll numbers make him give up on the wall? to make you everybody else... ♪ ♪ means to fight the hardest battle, which any human being can fight and never stop. does this sound dismal? it isn't. ♪ ♪ it's the most wonderful life on earth.

♪ ♪ iyou're smart,eat wyou already knew that.. but it's also great for finding the perfect used car. you'll see what a fair price is and you can connect with a truecar certified dealer. now you're even smarter. this is truecar.

[ring]n do this. here we go! discover. hi. i like your card. i love all the cashback and security features, but i'm not going to pay an annual fee. i'm just not going to do it! okay. okay? discover has no annual fee on any of our cards. so it wasn't my tough guy act? no. we just don't have any annual fees. that's a relief. i've been working on that for a long time. if we had talked a month ago, that would have been a whole different call. i can imagine. excuse me, sir. can i please have no annual fee? no annual fee on any card. only from discover.

as we celebrate the life of dr. martin luther king this weekend, we recognize those who have followed his lead like legendary congressman john lewis. he too is an icon of the civil rights era, bringing the same fervor and determination to his role in congress, and as you'll see in tonight's headlines on msnbc with joy reid, lewis borrowed tactics to advocate for common sense gun reform law. >> john said in his very quiet way, we have to do something dramatic, and then he paused and said, we have to do a sit-in. and when john lewis recommends that you do a sit-in, the only answer is yes, any way that i can help.

>> reporter: congressman lewis stepped onto the house floor on june 22nd. >> we're calling on the leadership of the house to bring common sense gun control legislation to the house floor. give us a vote! let us vote! >> reporter: then lewis and his group began an unprecedented sit-in to try and force a vote. >> they are not trying to actually get this done through regular order. no, instead they're staging protests. they're trying to get on tv. >> the chair wishes to make an announcement regarding the decorum in the house chamber. >> reporter: the republican leadership shut off c-span to try and block the protestors' access to the public. >> fortunately we had members who picked that up with facebook live, periscope, other social media tools. >> what made it so powerful was that there was an attempt to actual lly broadcast it to the nation even when c-span wasn't running it. >> reporter: lewis and his colleagues kept the protest

going for 25 hours. >> and i'm here today to say, john lewis, we join you in getting into good trouble on behalf of the american people. coming up at 9:00 eastern on this martin luther king holiday weekend, msnbc's headlines salutes congressman john lewis, how the civil rights icon paved the way for a new generation. at 10:00, msnbc will air "hope and fury". it explores how social media influence civil rights until today. vil rights until toy.da hey, what is it? i realize i love you, but as long as you're with jessica, there can never be anything between us. listen cassie, there's no need to cry. besides, i've got really great news. you're leaving jessica? no. i just saved a load of money on car insurance by switching to geico.

i saved. i thought that meant something to you. geico. 15 minutes could save you 15% or more on car insurance. dad! hiding when i was supposed to be quitting. i thought, i should try something that works. i should try nicorette. nicorette mini relieves sudden cravings fast. anytime. anywhere. nicorette mini. you know why. we know how.

[indistinct conversation] [friend] i've never seen that before. ♪ ♪

i have... ♪ day 30 of the government shutdown and with only two days until the deadline for furloughed workers to not miss a second paycheck, the pressure is certainly on to make a deal, or is it? joining me now, democratic strategist and msnbc cricketer, adrian elrod. bill press and gop chairwoman amy chair cain yan. good to see all three of us. amy, i'll start with you on this one, 800,000 people on the cusp of missing another paycheck. big picture here, does anyone

have the moral high ground? how does anyone, you, anyone else, justify playing games like this when 800,000 peoples' livelihoods hang in the balance? >> it is happy about this. unfortunately we do have politics that are being played in place of actual people's lives and making sure that our citizens are moving forward in a positive fashion and making sure that our borders are secure and that our people are safe. you have this back and forth that has turned into a childish game where you now also have the dreamers, you've got daca also a part of this ping-pong ball game. you've got, like you said, 800,000 people or so that are living paycheck to paycheck that are waiting now, figuring out how are they going to pay their home mortgage, how are they going to feed their children. i have a girlfriend of mine whose husband works for the department of homeland security,

they have two children, one has a number of specialty doctors, and she said, look, i realize that this is important, that what the president is requesting is what we need, but i am frustrated. i don't know where i'm going to come up with our next payment. >> amy, does she want the president to cave? does she want him to save this for another day, to accept the offer at least of reopening the government and try to continue under that umbrella? >> she does see if we don't move forward in making sure that we get what the president is requesting as far as border security that we may not be able to recover in that area. so she is willing to stick it out. she's not happy about it, but she is willing to stick it out and take money from her family to help supplement. >> well, she has that. not everyone does. >> that's true. >> take a listen to what benny thompson said about this all this this morning. here sit. >> why are democrats opposed to any physical wall in addition to updated technology? >> well, i don't think democrats

are opposed to any physical barriers. it's just the president constantly evolves his description of the wall, just as he indicated mexico was going to pay for whatever was there. so, what we have to do is sit down, work through this and let the public know exactly what we're talking about and what they can expect. >> so adrian, even if democrats don't oppose a wall, at least in chunks, in parts along the path there of the border, like he says, is this a realistic path forward for nancy pelosi? >> yeah, it is, alex. i think chairman thompson is exactly right here because donald trump has changed his definition of what a wall is multiple times. is it a concrete barrier? is it steel fencing? is it stronger border security by putting more border patrol agents at the boarder? what exactly is his definition of a wall? what is what has sort of changed back and forth. alex, we talked a lot on your program about who is going to blink first.

we actual saw that donald trump is the one who did blink first. why? because his poll numbers have gone down significantly, with that core base of the 33, 34% of american voters who have stuck with him time and time again through thick and thin, we've now seen that -- we've seen that part of his base start to decline. that's why i think he had to come forward and say, you know what, i know democrats are not going to agree to this, but i'm going to be the one to at least, you know, try to have some sort of compromise, which is what he put out there. he knew that democrats wouldn't go for it, but at least we're starting to have a conversation. >> here is something interesting with this bill with democrats. they've been taking a stance that funding the border wall would be an immoral proposition. back 11 months ago, early 2018, democrats were willing to trade $25 billion for a path to citizenship for the dreamers. how can they justify their currents aer isation of moral high ground? >> i heard you ask that same

question a little while ago. i would give the same answer. there's a big difference between permanent protection for the dreamers, which is a program, by the way, doing great good, no problems with it at all until donald trump decided to bust it, didn't like it, threw it to congress and there's a big difference between permanent protection and a path to citizenship, which is part of that deal and three years of protection. i want to add one other thing. >> uh-huh. >> let's be real here. what's wrong is donald trump doesn't want the shutdown to end. he likes this shutdown. it keeps him in the center. it shows that he's got the power. he alone can keep these 800,000 employees out. i don't think he's serious at all about ending the shutdown, and it's in its 30th day. so you have the coast guard, the secret service, the tsa, national park service, forest service, go down the list who are being held hostage and forced to pay the price for his stubbornness. >> i don't know, amy. do you think the president likes keeping this shutdown going

because to adrienne's point, his poll numbers are going down among his base of supporters. he does not like that. >> i don't think he enjoys it at all. there's another poll out there that actually shows his numbers have jumped 19, 20% with hispanics, now at 50 to 51% in favor. >> i haven't been able to find that poll. but the president tweeted that out. >> i'll shoot that to you. >> i want to see that poll. >> i'll shoot that to you. but we also need to remember, okay, i don't care what you want to call it. is it a wall? is it a popsicle stick fence? is it a steel barrier, whatever the definition is, why does that really, really matter? and we also have to understand where are we at realistically with daca? because that is actually on hold. the supreme court on friday just gave out a list of what they're going to be hearing in the next term and daca wasn't even listed. so the earliest we could possibly hear that is october. >> very quickly, bill. >> no, it's on hold only because

the court said that trump's plan does not hold water and therefore it has to be reviewed. the court is the one to save daca on a temporary status. that's why it's on hold. again, donald trump -- he believes his poll numbers are going up. he's wrong. >> listen, the reason i have to say good-bye on time is because we have a new anchor here who is coming up after me, and he has not gotten used to the fact that i'm late getting to the show. i'm going to try to wrap this up and say thank you to all three of you. good to see you. >> thank you, you too. what rudy giuliani said on the talk shows and that's raising a whole lot of questions. that might not be good for the president. s. that might not be good for the president. no more excuses with cologuard.

we all make excuses for the things we don't want to do. but when it comes to colon cancer screening... i'm not doin' that. i eat plenty of kale. ahem, as i was saying... ...with cologuard, you don't need an excuse... all that prep? no thanks. that drink tastes horrible! but...there's no prep with cologuard... i can't take the time off work. who has two days? and i feel fine - no symptoms! everybody, listen! all you need is a trip to the bathroom. if you're 50 or older and at average risk, cologuard is the noninvasive option that finds 92% of colon cancers. you just get the kit in the mail, go to the bathroom, collect your sample, then ship it to the lab! this is your year! own it! cologuard is not right for everyone. it is not for high risk individuals, including those with a history of colon cancer or precancer, ibd, certain hereditary cancer syndromes, or a family history of colon cancer. ask your doctor if cologuard is right for you. covered by medicare and most major insurers.

that is a wrap for me. i'm alex whit. now i hand you to kendice gibson. >> hello, everyone. the president's plan for border barrier hits a wall. his offer to democrats fell flat after he offered limited protection for dreamers. what will it take to reopen the government? plus, another, what did he just say? moment there from rudy giuliani, the president's personal lawyer now saying that talks about a trump tower in moscow were happening as late as november, 2016. months after trump said this -- >> i've nothing to do with russia. >> i mean, i have nothing to do with russia. i don't have