sharpton and "politics nation." good evening. and welcome to "politics nation." tonight's lead, as we continue to wait for the mueller report to materialize, the democratic chairman of the house intelligence committee says if the report is not made public, he'll bring the public to the report. >> we will obviously subpoena the report. we will bring bob mueller in to testify before congress. we will take it to court if necessary. and in the end, i think the department understands, they're going to have to make this public. i think barr will ultimately understand that, as well. >> clapping back at the subpoena talk, president trump's allies in congress warning that if the report clears the president of collusion with russia, there

will be consequences if democrats continue to press the issue. >> the mueller report will be out soon. if there is no evidence of collusion between the trump campaign and the russian intelligence community, then that should be the end of all of this. i've seen no evidence of collusion. and if the democrats keep pushing this, it's going to blow up in their face in 2020. >> while the white house continues to sweat the mueller probe, i'm not even going to bother to show you the president's tweets this morning about witch hunt this and that. his former lawyer, michael cohen, stares down a three-day stretch of congressional testimony. twice before the senate and house intelligence committees. those are closed to the public. but on wednesday, cohen publicly testifies before the house oversight committee about his former boss' business dealings,

including the costs of those illegal payoffs to women the president allegedly had affairs with. i hope you save some of your oscar night popcorn, folks, because this week we might be getting a show. joining me now is kari sheffield, national editor of accuracy in media. pete dominic, host of siriusxm radio's "stand up." and jill wine-banks, special prosecutor, now msnbc legal contributor. let me go to you first, jill. what can we learn from the watergate investigation and hearings that could be instructive, particularly around the history of the mueller report going public? >> i think one of the most important things is that even if the mueller report goes public, which i certainly hope that it

will, and think there is a need for, we still need public hearings. the watergate case was informed by the senate having hearings with the witnesses evaluated by the american public. we could see their body language. we could hear their tone of voice. we could evaluate the testimony of one person against another and make a determination of what was true and what was not. congress' role is really important, and in this case, congress has to do oversight about what is happening. they can look at what laws need to be passed to prevent future outcomings like this. but they also can look at whether the president needs to be held accountable for political crimes. rather than for violations of the law, which is the limit of mueller. so i don't think we can count completely on mueller to answer all of our questions. it's really important to have hearings. the other thing we can learn from watergate is the way to get

this public may be by making an application to the chief judge of the d.c. court where the grand jury is sitting, asking that the information from the grand jury be released to the congress for its review and evaluation for impeachment purposes. and then as the court said in deciding to send our road map to the house judiciary committee, it may have to be made public if the congress thinks that the public interest demands that. so that's an alternative way to get this out to the public. >> kari, why would the white house and his allies -- his being the president's -- allies in the senate and in the congress resist going public if they are saying there's no evidence of collusion and there's nothing to worry about? if there's nothing to worry about, why are they trying to stop it from going public? >> well, we haven't seen evidence of that. and you heard your clip from -- >> we haven't seen evidence of

what? >> the report hasn't even been issued. >> but we've heard -- >> the horse before the cart. >> we've heard them say they do not want it to go public. my question is, why wouldn't they want it to go public? >> we just heard from lindsey graham, we do want it to go public. we know there is no collusion. we know over and over, despite in this country we have the presumption of innocence and despite all of the mainstream media and all of the democratic leadership trying to erode the right, the constitutional right to the presumption of innocence, that's what we're seeing. there is no collusion. and so let me tell you, adam schiff, played a quote from him, he said two years ago on "meet the press" he had more than circumstantial evidence of some sort of treasonous crime. where is it? it's been two years -- >> we don't know if we don't see the report. >> there is a presumption of innocence. >> how do we know what is there if we don't see the report, pete? >> well, we're going to see the report. we're going to see it all, i'm sure, in due time. i wish jill wine banks were in

charge. i don't know. kari, six men who have worked for trump in various capacities have pled guilty. they have been sentenced to federal prison. they're awaiting sentence. or they have already served time. 26 russian nationals, including 12 gru agents, all three guys, roger stone, paul manafort, michael cohen, worked for donald trump closely. he hired them. they're all birds of the same feather, a feather which is a corrupt crime family. and they've made their money their entire lives in nefarious, unethical and illegal ways. and those crimes are catching up to them. they pled guilty. they have gone to jail. i mean, when you say it's a witch hunt or when you sa i there is no collusion, they're in jail. they pled guilty. >> with all due respect, what you're saying is a red herring. >> i want to follow up on pete's point. because mueller details how manafort lied to almost everybody. look at this. he lied to tax preparers, bookkeepers, banks, the treasury department, department of justice, national security --

>> a ton of red herrings. >> sure. >> the special counsel's office. the grand jury, his own legal counsel, members of congress, members of the executive branch of the united states government. so the big question is, what is he trying to hide? he was a chairman of the president's campaign. >> he is trying to hide his own tax and bank frauds, according to this report. i want to point out -- all of the crimes that -- >> a report you said that we haven't seen yet? >> i'm saying according to the sentencing memo. according to the manafort sentencing memo, which is very narrow in scope. there is no implication within the manafort sentencing memo of any form of collusion with the trump campaign. there is zero connection. so, yes, there are some shady people who are around the president, who were trying to take advantage and exploit his political novice. we know that this president, when he was running, he had zero political experience. >> whoa, whoa, you're saying -- >> he had never run. >> you're saying that they -- >> i'm saying that these men -- >> i'm going ask the question. you're saying that they're exploiting the president's

political andnovice? is that what you said? >> yes. >> manafort was not involved in this campaign for a very long period at all. >> you're saying that -- >> i'm saying. >> exploiting the president's political novice. >> she's saying he is not qualified to be president and should not have been president. >> i'm saying he didn't attract the "a" team of the most polished establishment resumes for whether domestic or foreign policy advisers. >> he picked the worst people. >> people like yourself and the establishment did not want him in office. but the american people at the end of the day chose him. >> they established -- >> he lost by 3 million votes. >> you know, if you want to go against the constitution, which says that he won. >> i do. i do want to switch -- >> kari. >> we know for a fact -- >> you can't say the establishment -- >> we know peter schrock from the fbi did not want him. >> according to the popular

vote, it was not just the established, it is -- >> it's the constitution. >> broken. >> jill? >> thank you. all i can say is, listening to the screaming that's going on -- >> i keep getting interrupted. >> someone hasn't read the manafort sentencing document, because it does link russia to manafort. manafort, during the time that he was the campaign chair, was in collusion with the russians. and so that links -- >> during the campaign. >> yes. and i think we have to really stop and take a look. i think, regardless of what the outcome of the mueller investigation, if it were to say that we can't indict because department of justice rules don't let us indict, but here are the facts, or it could say there are no facts that link the president. either way, we need to know what

the conclusion is. and we can get that. as americans, we should be entitled to it. i think congress has a role to play in doing this. and that there is plenty of evidence that links too many of donald trump's closest allies to russia. why all the lies? keep asking yourself that. if there is no collusion, why is everyone lying about the meetings with russia? there's a reason. >> because paul manafort was trying to use the influence for his ukrainian clients. we know that. we know he was corrupt. we know he was trying to use the president. and when you talk about him giving poll data -- >> and we know that the president -- >> excuse me, i let you speak. when we saw -- you mentioned the report of manafort giving polling data to russians. that's nothing new. we already knew this. however, there is no proven link the president himself directed manafort to do this, as opposed to manafort using him and manafort trying to exploit this campaign for his own financial gain. >> that contradicts your

statement. >> no, it does not. >> let me say what i'm going to say before you disagree with it. you contradict -- you said that there was none. all of this was using a political novice that didn't know. but this happened during his campaign. so whether or not he knew what they were doing or not is a question that we'll have to see. but the real problem here is did they, because of their dealings, influence this president in terms of his positions on russia, and some of the decisions he made going into the white house. that's the question. >> sure. and let's look at the evidence. he pulled out of the nuclear accord with russia. putin was upset about that. trump has pushed nato to step up their defense. >> nobody has been friendlier with putin than donald trump. >> the facts tell a different story. trump is rebuilding nato by having our nato allies pay more of their own defense. who gets upset by that? putin does. trump is also -- >> where is donald trump when --

when president donald trump said that i take putin's word over the intelligence officers of this country, are you going to tell me that is not him leaning towards -- >> well, when you have andrew mccabe -- >> please respond to the question. >> i'm telling you, when you have the fbi, when you have andrew mccabe, his own inspector general, saying that andrew mccabe lied. he lied to his own team within the people he was supposed to be telling the truth. he lied repeatedly to them. you have peter strzok. why wouldn't the president push back? >> i want to get this right. i'll let you in, pete. so because you're saying that he later found out somebody lied, he later found out someone lied, he then therefore believes putin. >> listen, kari, you can't just throw out a whole bunch of names and think you're connecting dots that don't connect. you're saying peter mccabe -- >> ditto. >> i'm not, though. what i've said -- hold on. you can't answer -- the question

he asked is the most important question, i think. and your defense of president trump being tough on putin. he literally agreed with the president of russia over all of his intel agencies. >> and said that. >> and you're talking about peter strzok. that has nothing to do with 16 intelligence agencies. he agreed with putin over them. it was perhaps -- hold on, i'm not done. perhaps the most disgraceful moment of any president in the history of the country. there is no dot, no names you can throw out that defend that. >> hold it right there. my panel is sticking around. up next, stopping president trump's national emergency along the u.s./mexican border could ultimately be done through the courts or legislation. i'll ask a congresswoman who is casting her vote on tuesday. we'll be right back. l be righta. this isn't just any moving day.

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.

in just two days, the house is scheduled to vote on a resolution to terminate president trump's emergency declaration on border security. if it passes, it will then move on to the u.s. senate. at the same time, 16 states, led by california, are suing the president to block what they say is a misuse of presidential power. joining me now is congresswoman

nannette b nannette berrigan. congresswoman, the vote is tuesday. you have been very vocal about it. why are you opposing the president and his declaration of a national emergency at the border? >> well, because it's really the president's power grab. he didn't get what he wanted during the usual process when we went through the compromised bill. and this is his way of saying i'm going to go get it my own way. and we have to make sure to stop him, because this is a dangerous president and an attack on our democracy. >> what happens if the senate doesn't pass it? assuming he ge assuming it gets by the house, what happens if the senate does not go along with the vote? >> well, if the senate doesn't pass it, we're left to the courts. and as you mentioned, we have 16 states that are leading the effort on that. and that will be up to the court, certainly the ninth circuit will hear it, as well as other courts around the country. they will look at things on whether there is an emergency.

they will look at things like whether the states have any harm, because of the divergent of funds allocated to those states. >> now, is it not a constitutional question that as we deal with the balance of powers, legislative, executive and judicial, that once the legislative has -- legislature has voted on this wall -- this money for the wall, for the president then to come back, calling an emergency to put money in the wall that the legislature has already voted on. >> that's correct. this is really the president's way to circumvent congress and the balance of powers. he presented his case. congress said no. and so this is his way of going around. there's no doubt, this is a constitutional crisis. and that is why it's important that we stand united on a bipartisan basis to stop the president in congress and have

us act. i believe we could get the votes in the senate on the first go-round. but you're right. the president has said he's going to veto this. and if he does, we would need two-thirds, which is the much greater test. but i think we'll also send a message that is pretty strong that what this president is doing is wrong. >> now, you represent a district in california. he's been critical of california. he's criticized california for sancti sanctuary cities, how it handles the wildfires and talked about cutting off funds for the high rail trains in california. what do you feel this whole position against california has consistently been expressed by the president? what does -- has come from it? >> well, the president has -- this is his way of political retaliation for california leading the way on so many

issues and trying to punish californians. as you mentioned, he's now asking california to return billions of dollars in high-speed rail dollars. but -- and this happened, of course, about a day after the lawsuit went public that we're filing against the president and the administration for this declaration. and it's unfortunate. this is not how the country should be run. this is certainly not -- what was anticipated in the president retaliating against states who don't agree with him. >> now, i think somewhere along the way, we also have to deal with defining what is a national emergency. because clearly, we have emergencies from high levels of lead and water in certain cities, on and on and on. and yet we are told that the amount of people coming across the mexican border has actually started to go down. have we given in the language of the presidential power to give

an emergency -- call for emergency action, have we given the president too much power to even define what emergency is? >> well, i think the president is trying to take this power from congress. but if you listen to what the president is saying, unfortunately, he's telling lies. and there is no basis to declare an emergency. the apprehensions at the border are down. and, you know, we have secretary nielsen coming into the committee for homeland on march the 6th. so the following week, she will be coming to the committee, and that's a great opportunity, i think, to challenge her on some of the numbers the president is spewing, because they are, again some of the numbers from i.c.e. and administration. >> do you feel confident that this can be won either by the legislature, which is, of course, the house and the senate, or in the courts? do you feel that this can

successfully stop what this president has now put into play? >> i'm optimistic that the courts are going to take a really hard look at this. they're going to take a look at the president's own words and saying that he didn't have to do this. and they'll take a look at the time line. and also take a look at the fact that this was presented to congress and congress effectively said no. and we'll uphold the separation of powers that we have in the three branches of government holding everybody in check. and so i'm hopeful and optimistic for the courts to uphold here the constitution. >> he did say that he was doing this for other reasons. that certainly didn't sound like an emergency. i often quote, a fish wouldn't get caught if they kept their mouth shut. thank you congresswoman barragan. >> thank you. >> next, we have unmasked a racist who wants the ku klux klan to night ride again. i'll introduce you to him. gain i'll introduce you to him. minimums and fees.

they seem to be the very foundation of your typical bank. capital one is anything but typical. that's why we designed capital one cafes. you can get savings and checking accounts with no fees or minimums. and one of america's best savings rates. to top it off, you can open one from anywhere in 5 minutes. this isn't a typical bank. this is banking reimagined. what's in your wallet? you might or joints.hing for your heart... but do you take something for your brain. with an ingredient originally discovered in jellyfish, prevagen has been shown in clinical trials to improve short-term memory. prevagen. healthier brain. better life.

and now for this week's gotcha. a racist, unmasked in plain sight. like a caricature out of the 1915 film, "birth of a nation."

the publisher of an alabama newspaper, a southern gent, by the name of goodlow sutton, caught much heat for an editorial he wrote in the "democratic reporter" newspaper, headline "clan needs to ride again." in it, a sudden call for the ku klux klan to nightride against democrats and what he termed democrats in the republican party for wanting to raise taxes in the state. and he elaborated to the montgomery advertiser newspaper that, quote, if we could get the klan to go up there and clean out d.c., we would all have been better off. what does he mean by "clean out d.c.?" well, sutton explains. quote, we'll get the hemp ropes out, loop them over a tall limb and hang all of them. he even went as far as to compare the kkk, the oldest hate group in america, to the naacp,

saying, quote, the klan didn't kill but a few people, and wasn't violent until they needed to be. okay, enough quotes. there are thousands of black people in this country that remember living in the jim crow south, mr. sutton. and for the many that meant being terrorized by klan night rides. that included bombings, lynchings and burning crosses. but even with hate groups and hate crimes indeed on the rise, the kkk now is only a shell of what it was with people like you living off the memory of the past that will never happen again if there is justice. and it looks like we got some this weekend as the democrat reporter announced friday that alicia dexter, a black woman, will immediately take over as publisher and editor. oh, and i also hear that you

have been stripped of honors from both harvard university and the university of southern mississippi. makes sense. academics are smart. but understand this. now that you have some time on your hands, there will be no night rides or hangings or resurgence of the ku klux klan for that matter. because between your own board, your state and auburn university tigers and basic american history, we got you. not this john smith. or this john smith. or any of the other hundreds of john smiths that are humana medicare advantage members. no, it's this john smith. who we paired with a humana team member to help address his own specific health needs. at humana, we take a personal approach to your health, to provide care that's just as unique as you are. no matter what your name is. ♪

no matter what your name is. i'm a fighter. always have been. when i found out i had age-related macular degeneration, amd, i wanted to fight back. my doctor and i came up with a plan. it includes preservision. only preservision areds 2 has the exact nutrient formula recommended by the national eye institute to help reduce the risk of progression of moderate to advanced amd. that's why i fight. because it's my vision. preservision. also, in a great-tasting chewable.

when i was attorney general of california, we created the first of its kind implicit bias and procedural justice training of police officers. together with law enforcement leaders, recognizing that that needs to be addressed. when people carry a gun, if they are holding on to racial bias and making decisions about who they stop, who they arrest or potentially who they shoot, and if that decision is informed by bias, we need to deal with that. >> 2020 democratic presidential candidate, kamala harris. i had the chance to host the senator for lunch at the famous sylvia's restaurant in harlem this past thursday. we talked about criminal reform, among other things, including the way the race relations will play out in the 2020 race.

back with me, conservative commentator, kari sheffield, radio host pete dominic and former prosecutor, jill wine banks. we see the rise in hate crime. we see a lot of racial issues that have been raised all through this campaign, as well as through the presidency of donald trump from charlottesville to pittsburgh. how important is it that the democratic candidates specifically deal with racial disparities in this election, and who do you feel has the stronger background in terms of dealing with the issues to really come with something concrete here? >> i think it's a super important issue. one of the most animating issues. we saw the mid terms and special elections and the role that black women play in the special election in alabama. and i think it's vitally

important. i think if you don't understand the history of this country and the current systemic racist institutions in this country, then you're not going to be able to appeal to a certain segment of the voters, those of us who care deeply about those issues. and certainly people of color. not to mention women and other minorities. i think kamala harris and cory booker, obviously two people of color, are -- have a deep understanding of this. i mean, they have lived it, and they have read about it, and they have advocated on these issues. they have tried to be the change they want to see. and i think there's a number of other candidates, including white candidates, who care deeply about these issues, as well. but might not be able to speak to them, as well. >> well, let me ask you, jill. we saw the commission in '68, i believe. and little has changed in terms of equality for black americans since then. in fact, we've had to spend most of those decades fighting for it not to go backwards.

aren't we talking even more than just who will vote as pete raises, and i think accurately, but what the country is really going to stand for and what the country is going to live up to? >> i hope so. i think in an ideal world, to quote martin luther king, we would be judging people on the content of their character, not the color of their skin. and i would add, or their gender. but we aren't there yet. i am immediately shocked every day by the things that i see and hear that show me that we have not progressed much. in the days when i first started practicing law and i would be the only woman, it's still not that much better how women are treated. and the same is certainly true for all minorities. and i'm hoping that we will vote for the people who represent our values. it's time for us to have someone

who can lead and be a person of the character that we need. >> whoever the nominee ends up with the democratic party, president trump will clearly have to defend the fact that throughout his -- his presidency so far, he has not firmly dealt with the issues of racial inequality, and, in fact, has done things with his words. charlottesville and other situations, that seems to fan the flames. how will republicans defend him on that? >> well, i would recommend to your viewers to go watch president trump's statement that he just made on -- for black history month at the white house. he invited bob woodson, who has been a life-long fighter. he worked with martin luther king. also clarence henderson, who desegregated the woolworth counter in north carolina. he was at this event, as well. and the president went through all of the many things he's done for the african-american community. whether that's record low unemployment. and, yes, it started under barack obama. but the businesses now are

saying it's because of regulatory reform and tax reform passed by the republicans, which is -- leading -- can i also continue? >> gear toward -- >> other things. >> you spent your first minute talking about -- >> as in like he's also done criminal justice reform. he forgave debt. >> you've got to tell me how he deals concretely. what he has done in terms of fanning the flame. that was the question. i would like you to address the question, not who he invited to the white house. >> well, look at the results. again. criminal justice reform. landmark criminal justice reform passed by this administration in a bipartisan way. >> the republicans wouldn't pass it when obama was there. he's a white supremacist. the president of the united states is by his own words and policies. >> no. >> you can talk about what he did during black history month. >> these are specific policies. >> how can you go up against the vast majority of black folks in polls, public opinion? you sit here and talk about this man. but then you deny the voice of black opinion.

his policies don't -- apply to black people why don't they? >> he's rising in support. >> he's not rising in support. >> he is. jason reilly from the "wall street journal," an african-american writer, did research on this and showed, for example, the naacp put the president's approval rating among black voters at 21%. for a republican, that is over the moon. and i'm not saying -- >> naacp does not do polling like that. but let's -- >> look at the column. >> you talk about who he invites to a reception. >> no, i'm talking about the policies which were -- >> none of which were directed toward dealing with inequality, which i cited from the commission. now, where is his specific policy, not that if the rest of the country moves up, you just happen to move up with everybody else. what is the specific policies he will deal with in terms of racial inequality? >> absolutely. so opportunity zones. in particular, are targeting areas, whether it's urban or high poverty minority areas and

rural areas. >> major corporations can invest in these zones. how many of them are black-owned. >> he doesn't even have any black people working in the white house! this is tiresome. >> omarosa called him a racist. >> come on, rev. >> who called him a racist. >> completely unqualified to be there. >> jill, let me ask you this. you talked about values. what does it do to the american public and to our -- the way we're perceived around the world when we have a president that clearly talks about fine people on both sides in charlottesville and any other number of things. and he pointed out in the face of his administration. i don't know if there are any blacks in the west wing at all now, which may be why they invited to black history month. but what does it do to our values and the perception of what we stand for? >> i think that everything that donald trump stands for is

demeaning to a lot of people in america. and that's not based just on the color of people's skin, because it is demeaning to me, it is insulting to me. >>. and when he could sit there yesterday and say, i think my words are very nice, and i had nothing to do with sparking the kind of bad behavior that we have seen, where journalists and african-americans are attacked, that is a real problem. i just saw a very disturbing movie, which is nominated as a short for the academy awards tonight called "skin." and i think everyone should see that and think about how they react to what that movie means in today's world that we could live in a country where we still have not learned to accept people for their values and for who they are, how smart they are, what they do that's good for the country. >> we have to leave it there. thank you, kari, pete and jill. up next, movie stars are

lining up on the red carpet ahead of tonight's academy awards. will minorities get a fair share of the oscars? be right back. oh! oh! ♪ ozempic®! ♪ (announcer) people with type 2 diabetes are excited about the potential of once-weekly ozempic®. in a study with ozempic®, a majority of adults lowered their blood sugar and reached an a1c of less than seven and maintained it. oh! under seven? and you may lose weight. in the same one-year study, adults lost on average up to 12 pounds. oh! up to 12 pounds? a two-year study showed that ozempic® does not increase the risk of major cardiovascular events like heart attack, stroke, or death. oh! no increased risk? ♪ oh, oh, oh, ozempic®! ♪ ozempic® should not be the first medicine for treating diabetes, or for people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. do not share needles or pens. don't reuse needles. do not take ozempic® if you have a personal or family history of medullary thyroid cancer, multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2,

or if you are allergic to ozempic®. stop taking ozempic® and get medical help right away if you get a lump or swelling in your neck, severe stomach pain, itching, rash, or trouble breathing. serious side effects may happen, including pancreatitis. tell your doctor if you have diabetic retinopathy or vision changes. taking ozempic® with a sulfonylurea or insulin may increase the risk for low blood sugar. common side effects are nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, stomach pain, and constipation. some side effects can lead to dehydration, which may worsen kidney problems. i discovered the potential with ozempic®. ♪ oh! oh! oh! ozempic®! ♪ ask your healthcare provider if ozempic® is right for you.

the company who invented car vending machines and buying a car 100% online. now we've created a brand new way for you to sell your car. whether it's a few years old or dinosaur old, we want to buy your car. so go to carvana and enter your license plate, answer a few questions, and our techno-wizardry calculates your car's value and gives you a real offer in seconds.

when you're ready, we'll come to you, pay you on the spot, and pick up your car. that's it. so ditch the old way of selling your car and say hello to the new way... at carvana. to be nobody but yourself in a world which is doing it's best 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. ♪ ♪

we're just under an hour out from the red carpet coverage of tonight's academy awards. and while minorities and women remain woefully underrepresented as leads, creatives and industry gate keepers, 2018 was nonetheless a banner year for on-screen inclusion, driven largely by the game-changing success of marvel's "black panther," up for six oscars tonight, including the top prize for best picture, a first for a superhero film. also dancing with history tonight, i'm pleased to say my brooklyn brother, spike lee. here he is, seconds ago on the red carpet, who may become the first african-american to win as best director and receive the best director oscar for brilliant and timely "black

klansman" movie. a coveted category. joining me now, film and tv critic, rebecca theodore vashan. host of "signal" for nbc news. let me say that i'm glad to see more inclusion. we want to see even more. you know that many of us have campaigned on this in the civil rights community for years. in fact, just in 2016, i led a rally at the oscars and was protesting the lack of nominations. so i'm glad to see nominations. and we're not asking for this as some kind of affirmative action. we're saying these are people that have done equal creative and good work. >> right. >> what is your leanings

tonight. who are you rooting for, and what does this mean to the academy award and going further to get even more inclusion? >> right. well, as you mentioned, i think "black panther" being the first comic book movie getting a best picture nod is historic. because i know a lot of people were very nervous about this movie coming out. but it's been critically acclaimed. audiences loved it. at one point over $1 billion. $700 million domestically. so i don't know if it's going to win best picture. i'm glad it got the nomination. but i am rooting for ruth carter, who is up for costume design for "black panther." >> right. >> her work was amazing and hannah beachler, first black person to be nominated for production design. so we're really -- i'm really rooting for her. >> what should we be looking for, simone, as we watch the academy tonight? >> well, i just want to point out, rebecca, i'm so glad that you brought up hannah beachler and ruth carter. because this is not only

historic for "black panther" tonight being nominated for best picture, the first time that a superhero film has been nominated. but we're talking about representation for black talent behind the for black talent behind the scenes which is key as well. i want to point out that "black panther" has already won in so many ways. it outpaced financial expectations at the box office and it's created a franchise for black talent both on camera and behind the scenes. these are jobs created for black artists for years to come. and then also, there are these role models that have been created for little boys and girls around the world. we saw this with halloween last year. they're able to dress in the costumes which is significant for them and to feel represented. again, i have to agree with rebecca here. i'm not sure that "black panther" will walk away with best picture tonight but it's still a historic evening

nonetheless. >> what does this do in terms of the culture in terms of america? hero stars are important. and when people grow up seeing images that in the past have been excluded it helps in terms of how it shapes the mentality of americans. >> right. and speaking of "black panther" we have into the spider verse which is up for the best animated picture and the main character is an afro latino teenager, miles morales. one of the directors is ramsey and a co-director who is of latino descent. i took my nephew to see "into the spider verse" and i tweeted a picture of him in front of the post. it went viral. so many people were sharing pictures of their children all races, all all genders taking

pictures. these are opening and broadening what kind of narratives we can have with people of color. doesn't have to be just comedies. it doesn't just have to be, you know, painful, traumatic dramas. we can be in any kind of genre. >> now, simone, when you look at the academy awards tonight, we are also looking at the fact that as i said there were real struggles from all levels, #oscars all too white, to other things, that moved us to this point. really to show american cinema at its best. because we are talking about people both on camera and behind the camera that have been doing excellent work that has been ignored or marginalized for decades. >> yeah. i think that oscar, #so white oscar started a conversation and

when you have films as successful as "black panther" it puts hollywood at ease. look, we can make minority led films that deliver financially. tonight, everyone is looking at the best director category which has alfonso car robe in there and spike lee in there. i have been talking to some folks at the academy. there's a great deal of support for spike lee tonight. they feel like ""blackkklansman"" is brilliant. so i think if he does win for best director, it could be seen as a -- as recognizing his entire body of work and not just this fill. >> do you feel it stimulates d and -- and making money is important. but do you feel it stimulates a conversation in this country that needs to be had in a broader level because i have known many whites that have taken their kids to see things

like "black panther" and "blackkklansman" that their children started to discuss things like this? >> i think they're definitely conversation starters and to call them action. not just enough to be a passive viewer, but to actually go out and have these conversations and to use social media, whatever kind of resources you can use to be an ally. because that's a huge conversation of how can i be an ally for more representation and to basically -- how do we dismantle white supremacy. >> i'm going to hold it there. thank you, rebecca and simone. up next, my final thoughts. stay with us. thoughts stay with us this is amazing. with moderate to severe ulcerative colitis, are you okay? even when i was there, i never knew when my symptoms would keep us apart. so i talked to my doctor about humira. i learned humira can help get, and keep uc under control

when other medications haven't worked well enough. and it helps people achieve control that lasts. so you can experience few or no symptoms. 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, control is possible. we're finally going on the trip i've been promising. because with expedia, i saved when i added a hotel to our flight. ♪ so even when she outgrows her costume, we'll never outgrow the memory of our adventure together.

unlock savings when you add select hotels to your existing trip. only when you book with expedia. but some give their clients cookie cutter portfolios. fisher investments tailors portfolios to your goals and needs. some only call when they have something to sell. fisher calls regularly so you stay informed. and while some advisors are happy to earn commissions whether you do well or not. fisher investments fees are structured so we do better when you do better.

maybe that's why most of our clients come from other money managers. fisher investments. clearly better money management. i can customize each line for each family member? yup. and since it comes with your internet, you can switch wireless carriers and save hundreds of dollars a year. are you pullin' my leg? nope. you sure you're not pullin' my leg? i think it's your dog. oh it's him. good call. get the data options you need and still save hundreds of dollars. do you guys sell, other dogs? now that's simple, easy, awesome.

customize each line by paying for data by the gig or get unlimited. get $250 back when you pre-order a new samsung galaxy. click, call, or visit a store today. as i watched the academy awards tonight, i want to make it clear that, yes, we have our preferences. but we were not asking for special treatment for blacks, for women and others that have not been nominated and selected or given credit in certain areas. we were asking to stop the mistreatment. yes, i have personal preferences. spike lee and i come out of brooklyn together and to see his creative genius having been ignored for decades, i'm glad to see spike nominated and i'll be rooting for spike. not just because i have known him but because he has been a

director that has been ingenious and we have seen him also active in moving society forward. i know chadwick boseman who stars in "black panther." there we are with chadwick. who also has played thurgood marshall and james brown. aside from my personal preferences i want to see american culture stop discriminating against people because they see them as envision and their work unworthy. it is time that excellence is judged equally and may the best man or woman win tonight. but let us win on an even playing field. that does it for me. thanks for watching. i'll see you back here next saturday at 5:00 p.m. eastern. until then, keep the

conversation going. like us @facebook.com/politics nation and follow us on twitter @politics nation. up next, "meet the press" with chuck todd. this sunday, waiting for mueller. >> the washington waiting game goes on. >> we're waiting for the mueller report. >> they're waiting for robert mueller's report. >> with robert mueller said to be wrapping up, still so many unanswered questions. what did president trump know about the infamous trump tower meeting? was there coordination between the trump campaign and russia? most of all, why does it seem the president doesn't want to get to the bottom of what russia did? we'll break it all down with neal katyal. acting solicitor general. sol wisenburg, and jim himes.