that's all for this edition of "dateline." . > welcome to "kasie dc." i'm kasie hunt. we're live every sunday from washington from 7:00 to 9:00 p.m. eastern. breaking tonight, fallout from ilhan omar's comments on twitter. plus, paul manafort

decision to move the embassy from tel aviv to jerusalem. the president mused, if he could run for prime minister of israel, he would be at 97% in the polls. the comments the president made behind closed doors go a step further than what he told white house reporters on saturday. >> the democrats have become an anti-israel party. they've become an anti-jewish party. and i thought that vote was a disgrace and 0 does everybody

else if you get an honest answer. >> in that i would like to welcome in my panel johnathan swan in his newsletter and communications director of the trump 20 re-election campaign mark lotter. jonathan swan, i will start with you. take us behind the scenes of these remarks. you say you have three sources telling you this is what happened in the room but it sounds like they went to some lengths to try to get this from getting out there. >> it was actually in the tent is the right way to describe it. they erected a pool over mar-a-lago, beautiful tent with chandeliers. this time because they didn't want any leaking, they made all of the guests put their cell phones into pouches with magnets so you had them in these magnetized pouches and you can only unmagnetize it when you left. but people remember things and store things in their mind. so, yes, what you set up is exactly right. i should add like this was received incredibly well in the room, roaring laughter, cheers, et cetera. and it was trump taking it to another level. i don't think i have heard him say flat out democrats hate

jewish people but that was a direct quote. >> that was jeff mason who covers the white house every day. >> haven't heard him say that, no. >> but i think what's important here is to look at jonathan's reporting and analyze what the president is doing. this is building on what he said on friday to white house reporters. he's trying to paint himself as the only candidate who should be getting jewish votes in 2020. and trying to paint the democratic party with the broad brush because of something that one congress person said. clearly it's created challenges for the democratic party but $not true to say all democrats hate views.

>> mark, do you agree -- you're the spokesman for the president' campaign, do you think democrats hate jewish people? >> i'm not going to use that language specifically but i think it's important for this message to get out that there are many things that the democrats have done in recent years, not just in recent months with one congresswoman's quotes. let's remember president obama was widely and correct lip correctly called the most anti-u.s. president in u.s. history and that's something people remember. this is building upon what the president did during the 2016 campaign when he would go to different voting blocs and maybe some who did not traditionally vote republican, voted democrat, and said give us a chance. he's making the case as he's showing in many cases the actions of the democratic party have not been in the favor of israel and this is the latest example of it. >> if this is the case, though, why are the members of congress who are jewish, the elected

people, overwhelmingly democrats? there are only a handful of jewish republicans. >> i understand, it's a long, historic trend. but what the president is saying is it's time for people to break through those traditional political allegiances, take a look at the results in terms of things that happened not only just under president trump but also go back and look at some of the things that have happened in recent years, as i said, with president obama. you had the u.s. abstaining on u.n. action that condemned israel, first time in a long time, if ever, we had done that. under the previous administration, there are a lot of things that the republicans and president trump is doing that's pro-israel. >> you think that adds up to democrats hazing jewish people? >> i think there's been a lot of anti-jewish sentiment shown in recent years and this is the president highlighting it. >> jonathan swan, setting that aside for a second, there was a

lot more in the remarks. there was a comment specifically about blackface as well. what was said? >> the way it was described to me by three separate people who were in the tent was trump went on a tangent about how he was home alone at the white house over christmas and he described -- he described the scene of opening the curtain and looking out the window and seeing secret service agents with night vision goggles, and he joked they were in blackface because they had masks on, and he said now they're in blackface so we need to get rid of them or something. he was clearly making a joke about ralph northam and the controversy in virginia. it did sound a little -- you know, when he goats on those tangents. >> marc, you're kind of on the spot with these comments but is it ever acceptable to joke about blackface? >> i think he's joking the tactical gear and masks worn by the secret service are black and

given the recent controversy they would have to change that. it was a joke. again, your reporting indicated people laughed and saw that for what that was. >> so it was a joke and also the republican donors in the room thought it was funny? >> you're reporting on it. i was not in the room, so -- >> do you dispute any of this as a spokesman for the trump campaign? do you dispute anything? >> i wasn't there. when i saw jonathan's report tonight, chicked with some folks who also weren't there but heard similar stories from folks they talked to that were there. i think what's important is the context. this is the president holding court, so to speak, with close advisers, friends, longtime mar-a-lago guests and republican donors. he's telling stories. he's recounting various things. it is not prepared remarks or anything. it's the president up there engaging with folks that was well received according to your reporting and jonathan and i think that's what it was

intended to be, very just informal, story telling. >> you're saying it was sort of normal? >> i'm saying he was entertaining a crowd on many issues. those are the things you highlights. it was pretty long -- from what i understand, he spoke for a while. >> jeff mason, you covered many presidents. how would you characterize this sort of language towards jewish people, joking about blackface, compared to other presidents that you covered? >> well, i think it's been two years president trump has been in office and he ran the 2016 campaign and busted through a lot of norms. so i think we're seeing that happen here and there's no doubt it will be happening in the next couple of years. but is it a norm that is busted through. it is unusual. >> understatement. republican donors also told jonathan the president insisted on friday that they never called apple ceo tim cook tim apple. the sources say the perfects claimed it was, quote, fake news

and told them he actually said tim cook apple but just said it really fast and the cook part was too soft. let's go to the videotape on that. >> we have so many companies coming in, people like tim, you're expanding all over and doing things i really wanted do right from the beginning. i said tim, you have to start doing it over here and you really have. you really put a big investment in our country, thank you very much. tim apple. >> did you hear cook? anyone hear cook? >> there's definitively not a word between tim and apple in that video. >> seriously, this is not the first time the president disputed something we've seen on a video, jonathan swan. >> yes, he privately in "the new york times" told at least one senator the "access hollywood" tape that recorded him speaking lewdly about women might have been a fake voice. he obviously admitted it was him.

>> this points to a bigger problem, jeff. if anything, he dealt with problems in the 2016 election with fake news, false news on facebook and the frontier of this is fake video. >> yes. >> which i think mon of us may be prepared to grapple with. >> that's a challenge for everybody reporting on the president, reporting on the campaign but also a challenge for voters to decide what they can accept or tolerate from a leader or candidate who says one thing when there's evidence to -- very clear evidence that goes against what he or she is saying. >> this is a fun start to the evening. jonathan swan, thank you so much for all of that. we have a lot more to come tonight. congressman ro khanna represents silicon valley. and elizabeth warren's comment to break up facebook, google and amazon. and the president and michael cohen accuse each other of being liars over talks about pardons during a weekend which more checks from the president was revealed.

and as we go to break, this friendly advice from charles barkley. >> america, i'm just gonna tell you something. >> what's that? >> do not commit crimes with checks. come on, man, if you're gonna break the law, do not write a check. break the law, do not write a check. 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. we seem to be learning more about the criminal activity of president trump's former advisers with each passing day, and this week that trend is set to continue. over the course of the next five days, paul manafort will appear before a judge here in washington for his second sentencing hearing. roger stone will update the very same judge on his compliance with the gag order. former national security adviser michael flynn will provide a status report on his sentencing and former campaign aide rick gates will do the same.

of course, all of that is to say nothing of michael cohen, who the president thrust back into the spotlight on friday by admitting he discussed a pardon with cohen directly. it is a lot to keep track of. and we struggle sometimes to crystallize what it all means. but outgoing deputy attorney general rod rosenstein may have been trying to do that when he said this at the end of a speech on thursday -- >> i want to leave you with the wisdom of an ancient proverb, if you desire to know a person's character, consider us friends. >> joining the conversation former fbi assistant director and msnbc national security analyst frank frank figliuzzi and join vance. i'm honored to have you both together. this is a top-notch team to dig into all of this, marc lotter, jeff mason still with us. we talked about the hearings from michael flynn and rick gates. let's start by focusing on the two of them. what have we learned from those hearings? >> we may get some glimpses this

week as to where mueller is going and the timing of his report. by that i mean if we hear gates and flynn both say -- and prosecutors agree -- that they're ready to be sentenced it could well mean essentially their cooperation is over. mueller rung him dry and he's ready to issue his report. another thing that can happen this week in manafort's sentencing is if he's the greatest player in the toolbox, we could see his sentencing trigger the mueller report. an important week. >> joyce vance, let's talk about what happened next with manafort. there was frankly a lot of outrage over the sentence he got from judge ellis over the people following it closely and a lot of question whether there was a disparity there with others who committed different crimes. what's your take on the sentence he got there and how bad can it get in some of the other sentences he was facing?

>> the sentence was shockingly low, about 75% what was the guideline range that the judge should have imposed for sentencing. but the who practice in the eastern district of virginia say that's one of ellis' habits and not to read too much into it, it seems particularly unjust given this defendant's conduct. what's ahead for manafort in d.c. is a very different scenario. here the statutory maximum he faces is ten years. and although federal sentencing is complicated and technical, it makes it very likely the judge will impose close to or at the maximum ten years. there's a question of whether he serves that after he serves the 47 months in virginia. i suspect she will do that at least in part so his sentence will be dramatically longer by the end of this week. >> this is the same judge that's going to have to deal again with roger stone. who seems to be continuing to break his gag order.

what's your view of his activities? >> i think he breaks his gag order as easily as he breathes. it just seems impossible for him to go 48 hours without getting into trouble. >> i would have predicted that but this soon. >> the judge has been appropriately patient. what you don't want to do is put him in jail quickly and impair his ability to prepare for trial. but at some point if he persistently violates the gag order which is meant to ensure this jury will not hear evidence in advance of the time they're in the courtroom, it's meant to protect the integrity of his trial as much as possible and if he continues to violate the gag order, she will ultimately take more severe steps to keep him in line. >> frank, what are you looking for this week in terms of trying to figure out when we're going to see this mueller report? i feel like i've been on pins and needles every friday for the last couple of weeks. i'm sure you guys have been as well. do we think he's finished with indictments or will there be more to come first?

>> i have been one of the people on campus who says all of the talk about an imminent report starting months ago was premature. and maybe even a strategy out of the white house to try and create a false expectation and say mueller's way overdue for a report. i think we're close but there's still so much to be done here. one of the things we need to look for is not only manafort sentencing and, of course, what happens with gates and flynn as indicators, but then signaling between barr and mueller and whether barr is issuing statements that indicate something is coming imminently. my focus is going to be clearly on flynn and gates and whether or not mueller said they're fully cooperating, we're done with them, or whether he says i need more time with them. if he says i need more time with him, this report is not coming imminently. >> what indicators are you looking for? let's hypothetically say we

actually get a look at it, which is obviously clearly a big question already, but what are you looking for that might not be in there? >> we're all talking about what will be in there, whether or not it's grand jury information or how you classify it. what we may not see is references to the trump families or other players that obviously are exposed, to me knowing how mueller thinks, it's likely he farmed that out to the southern districts of new york and prosecutor's arms, not that he ignored it, rather than it's someone else's job to do. >> jeff, take us behind the scenes at the white house right now. are they like me on pins and needles waiting for each friday to fry to figure out what's going on? is it affecting their day to day or not really? >> one thing i will tell you i noticed -- i can't remember exactly when he came in but they staffed up a little bit. even on the press side. they brought in somebody who was there specifically to talk to reporters like you and me about

this. they've been preparing for some time. i was on the vietnam trip. that was the week michael cohen also did his testimony. i think they're getting used to running the country, but also preparing for this and for all of the other things that keep happening related to the inquiry and related to these outside issues that have overshadowed his presidency really from day one. >> is the campaign doing the same, marc? >> we can't control what we can't control. i think the campaign and much of the american people want this to be over and director mueller decides it's time to finish his work and issue a report, then we will move on and we will see what it leads to. so far, no collusion. >> so far. we will see. coming up on "kasie dc," we will talk all about michael cohen.

will talk all about michael cohen. it's hard to find good help these days and if you don't believe me, ask president trump. lawyers long since gone still show up in his speeches and twitter feed to this day. >> as you know, the attorney general says i'm gonna recuse myself. and i said, why the hell didn't

he tell me that before i put him in? the attorney general is weak and ineffective and he doesn't do what he should have doan. michael cohen lied about the pardon. a stone-cold lie. his lawyers said they went to my lawyers and asked for pardons. ky i can go a step above that but i won't go through it now. it's the most ridiculous suit i have ever seen. bad lawyer. i had a bad lawyer. >> the president long ago soured over central members of his legal team. for instance, he recordedly pressured white house counsel done mcghan to stp jeff sessions from recusing himself in the russia probe in the spring of 2017. "the new york times" reported mr. mcghan was unsuccessful and the president erupted in anger in front of numerous white house officials saying he needed his attorney general to protect him. mr. trump then asked, where is my roy cone? his longtime, win at all costs, new york city lawyer?

>> donald cannot take back seat. donald has to run the show because his personality is such, his intelligence is incredible. oops the man is literally a genius. i have been his lawyer since he was 23 years old. when i said i have been his lawyer, sometimes i feel like his lawyer. i always feel like his friend. but it's a very unusual relationship. he doesn't leave any hint to me. if there's a case involving $1,100 over whether one foot should go in one apartment or another part, donald will know every detail of that $1,100 case. >> roy cohn was loyal until his death and michael cohen echoed what you just heard but in a much different context. >> don jr. would never set up any meeting of significance alone and certainly not without checking with his father. and i also knew nothing went on in trump world, especially the campaign, without mr. trump's

knowledge and approval. so i concluded that don jr. was referring to that june 2016 trump tower meeting about dirt on hillary, with the russian representatives when he walked behind his dad's desk that day. >> roy cohn meant donald trump was involved in his affairs as a compliment. michael cohen meant it as a reason for scrutiny. and all of this is in stark contrast from what we used to hear from him. >> michael cohn, you told me day one he's going to win. >> i did. >> you never had a doubt? >> because i know mr. trump. i stood by him shoulder to shoulder for the past decade. i've seen him in action. i know when donald trump wants something, there's nothing that will stop him from achieving his goal.

>> ever since that day he knows i have the same kind of crazy fight in me that he has in him. >> michael cohen is now suing his former client for nearly $2 million in what he says are unpaid legal fees. and joyce vance, this really has turned to the credibility of michael cohen, because there are now real clippers about whether he was telling the truth when he talked to the committee just last week or the week before. my sense of time is completely lost. i think it was the week before last, and said that he did not discuss a pardon with the president. the president final slimed to acknowledge it on friday. what's your view of whether he's in continued jeopardy? >> the problem that michael cohen has is not an unusual problem that prosecutors and agents face. you have someone who's had a career history as a criminal, they've told a lot of lies, how do you trust them now that

they're cooperating with law enforcement? and so for cohen, a lot of that is collaboration -- corroboration. there has to be evidence that corroborates him every step of the way. it's hard to just take him on faith. it's i think very odd that he's stepped into these muddy waters. seems to have done it deliberately, talking about whether or not there were hards pardons and opened with credibility. and just have to be cautious and can't take him at face value. >> is it once a liar, always a liar situation, frank? >> it's not if you can independently krieb rate statements and put them in proper context and get other people to support the statement. but who's telling the truth about who approached who first about the pardon, in my book it doesn't matter about the first approach, what matter is what the receptivity was and followup on the trump side. if indeed cohen made the first approach about a pardon is what

matters if the trump side through his lawyers entertained the idea and took steps to witness tamper or obstruct by dangling the pardon further. >> you don't think it matters whether or not keen lied to congress again in his public testimony? >> if he lied to congress again, his voracity is in even deeper trouble. he's highly motivated to get this right or he will spend more time in prison and incur the wrath of the southern district and he should not be doing that. >> yeah. joyce, what's your sense of the degree to which robert mueller's conclusions in whatever report he finally issues hinges on the things he learned from michael cohen? >> if it hinges on michael cohen's testimony, it won't be just michael cohen. for prosecutors to put together a case, they might use cohen for instance to narrate the story. or to give them leads about what to follow up on. but if keen's testimony is central to anything that they build another case on, it won't be a jury just hearing michael cohen without anything more. although i will say whatever's

interesting about the entire back and forth on the pardon is michael cohen has testified under oath and the president has not. the president is twitter testifying again. maybe he needs to go under oath too if we're going have these two dueling stories. >> as we wrap up here, frank, i couldn't help but listen to you guys chat during the break. i'm curious, we've been hearing that robert mule cere going to wrap up imminently. what loose ends might be left undone if he is, say, feeling pressure to wrap up early or wrap up on a certain time line? what in your mind are things that still need to happen in this investigation for it to be complete? >> the seminole question, the core of this inquiry, was all about collusion with russia, the degree to which russia has a government meddled in our election. we have had two dozens indictments of russians including 12 russian intelligence officers, but still we're missing that link back to

the knowledge of the white house, the candidate at the time and direction, encouragement or just not reporting what he knew. that's a huge gap. but then the obstruction gap is there for me as well. whether or not the attempts to obstruct, repeated evidence we have of that, are going to be addressed by mueller or somebody else. i think mueller would want to address that and we're not there yet. >> frank figliuzzi, joyce vance, thank you both as always for your insights. just ahead, congressional democrats get their documents about ivanka trump and jared kushner after they're apparently leaked by someone in the administration. joining me next on the set, congressman ro khanna of the house oversight committee.

the house oversight committee is now turning its attention to how ivanka trump and jared kushner were granted top security clearances. according to axios, the committee obtained leaked documents detailing how their clearances were approved and who was involved in the process. these are documents the trump administration previously declined to provide. for more on this, let's bring in democratic congressman ro khanna of california. he's a member of the house oversight committee. we have seen him questioning michael cohen a couple of weeks ago.

sir, thank you for being here. >> kasie, great to be back on. >> what is next for the oversight committee to try to get to the bottom of -- there's been reporting the president himself had to clear the security clearance for jared kushner after repeatedly lying about it? >> here's why this matters. no one is saying jared kushner cannot work on white house innovation and ivanka trump can't work on childcare tax credit but they shouldn't have top secret clearance when it comes to foreign policy.

and there are reports shared kushner has been sharing this information in the president's daily brief with mbs in saudi arabia, giving information on dissidents. we need to make sure, one, why he has that clearance and who ordered these decisions? >> do you think it would be illegal if he was actually doing that? >> who knows. i don't want to speculate but certainly it's compromising sensitive information and we want to know what information he was handing over. the president, look, has the absolute right to give somebody national security clearance but the question is why? the question is why are you overturning john kelly, your career officers and putting kushner in charge of middle east peace and having him on what's app, as the report suggests, the crown prince? >> what is the next step for the committee on this issue? >> hopefully the white house will cooperate. elijah cummings said he doesn't want a subpoena. he wants voluntary compliance. we want to know what the process was, who made the decision and why were the decisions made? most important, why were career officers overruled? >> let's switch, you represent silicon valley. >> i do. >> a favorite topic on this show. elizabeth warren made recently what is perhaps her boldest policy proposal yet and it has to do with big tech. >> the giant tech companies right now are eating up little tiny businesses, start-ups, and competing unfairly so what i'm saying is we got to break these guys apart. want to run a platform, that's fine. you don't get to run a whole bunch of businesses as well.

want to run a business as well, you don't get to run the platform. think of it this way, like in baseball, you can be an umpire or own one of the teams but you don't get to be an umpire and own the teams. >> you're a progressive, that's the wing of the party elizabeth warren is from. we're going to talk about bernie sanders a little later on in the show with you, so let's stick to warren. do you think this is a good policy proposal? >> i think she's right we need stronger antitrust law but i think it has to be a case-by-case basis to go after the privileging on platforms. let me give you the paradigm case, microsoft's case, where the government went after microsoft for tying the internet explorer. they said you can't privilege internet floorer. but the government never broke microsoft up. there's a difference to say whether you should privilege companies and make sure they aren't preferencing their own products versus breaking them up.

>> let's take facebook as a case. if you want to remove yourself from facebook, you're not in a position to take yourself off facebook, instagram, what's app. they snapped up all of these -- you don't have necessarily a lot of choice and they're doing that deliberately. do you think that's fair? >> i had said when facebook acquires what's app and when they acquired instagram, they should have been reviewed. the horizontal mergers, the sec should have reviewed it. but now you can't just break it up in a due process in the department of justice. they need to review that. you look at the history of silicone valley, whether it was microsoft, aol, whether it was yahoo! or ebay, these companies have lost and new companies have emerged. the key is to make sure they can't privilege their own products.

i don't think breaking up is necessary and certainly shouldn't be a political question. it should be a case-by-case question for the ftc or doj. >> we should disclose to our viewers you have endorsed our co-chair for bernie sanders, as we talk about his policies. >> i have great respect for elizabeth warren. we have slight differences maybe on this issue but in general she's terrific >> fair enough. amy klobuchar at south by southwest pitched a tax on big-tech profits on consumer data. is that an idea you think you can get behind? >> i would have to look at the specifics. i think consumers should own their data and there may be some value they would get but here's the thing, that may amount to a few hundred dollars for individuals. you know what the real issue is? the real issue is rural communities and communities of color don't have access to technology jobs. i wish people were talking about how are they going to create technology jobs in communities? how are they going to make them part of the new economy as opposed to saying, okay, let's give you a few hundred dollars for your data. that's not solving the challenge of the digital age. >> a local question for you, tlez some concerns about the ipos that are coming at us, and the way that's going to affect housing in san francisco and surrounding areas. how do you make it so that normal people can live in the bay area? >> that's a huge question.

we need much more funding for public housing. elizabeth warren has a good program to give many more grants to local cities for affordable housing. and by that we're not talking about affordable housing just for homeless but teachers and firefighters and nurses. >> would you support taxing big tech to pay for it? >> i would. i would support taxing tech and generally people well off. the federal government has enough money. what i would do is reverse the trump tax cuts and bush tax cuts and put that money into affordable housing grants for cities to build more housing. >> all right. congressman ro khanna, stick with us. when we come back, we're going to talk about senator bernie sanders. whose campaign you mentioned. sanders is back on the trail and turning out big crowds as he takes on the president and modern democrats. >> the struggle that we are engaged in is not just about this, we have to know what fight is. it's not just the entire

republican body. - how many people love you unconditionally?

while you ponder that, consider adopting a rescue pet. there are 6.5 million of them; they all need a forever home. it would mean the world to them, and they will love you forever.

's not just the entire republican body. those ideas that we talked about when we came here to new hampshire four years ago, ideas that seemed so very radical at that time, well, today virtually all of those ideas are supported by a majority of the american people and they are being supported by democratic candidates from school board to president of the united states. >> that was senator bernie sanders in new hampshire earlier today. a new poll shows that 25% of voters there say he is their first choice for president, up six points since december. but at the top of the list is former vice president joe biden, who has yet to officially enter the race. and biden's anticipated entry may be helping to clear the democratic field. we should know that poll is actually out of iowa, not new hampshire.

we saw senators sherrod brown and jeff merkley and former new york city mayor michael bloomberg all say they're not running in the past week. in the same iowa poll, 64% of likely caucus goers say biden should run this time around. and 31% say he should hold off because they think his time has passed. joining our conversation now is the former senior adviser to the sanders campaign in 2016 and congressman ro khanna is back with us, along with the rest of our panel. you worked for senator sanders last cycle. you won't be working with him this time around. what do you think senator sanders has learned or did learn sanders has learned or did learn since 2016 that would help him in 2020? >> he learned an enormous amount. when you first run for president of the united states, it's an extraordinary jump even if you're coming from the united states senate. i think he learned a lot about the way you guys in the media work, the demands of a candidacy and organization that needs to be put together. we were pretty notorious last

time around because you covered it and know this. we were a pretty thin and lean machine last time around. i think he recognizes the need for more infrastructure and robust campaign than he had last time. >> he did not have a lot of institutional support last time around. there have been several elected lawmakers along with you who have jumped on board. you're one of the younger members of congress. how do you respond to citizen that bernie sanders will be relatively old if he were elected president and the democratic party may need a new younger face. >> he's most popular with the millennial, i'll tell you why. for two reasons. he has stood up for unconstitutional wars. the next generation is tired of the wars and the college and income divide where they're growing up in an economy where

they don't think the american dream is as accessible to them as their parents. >> mark, when i covered the many sanders rally you were referring to. there was some crossover between bernie sanders and donald trump. a lot of people who were there were saying, the person i like next best is donald trump. how concerned is the president about having to run against bernie as the nominee. >> the campaign is not worried about any of the democratic candidates now. >> with all due respect that isn't the case. if it is, you aren't doing your job. >> what we're seeing out of that iowa poll, 56% of iowa caucus goers said they preferred a candidate more likely to take the country towards socialism. we will have it whether it's social list bernie sanders coming out of california and the free no one has to pay for

anything platforms, we'll have that debate. >> jeff, leads talk about socialism for a second, an interesting divide. millennials hear that, they think sweden. it's a much different perception than older voters. that's clearly the argument this president is making, already started talking about it in the state of the union. how do you think it plays out in the democratic primary? >> he is talking about it. mark is talking about it. that is an argument president trump is happy to go up against. how it plays out, we will see. the younger millennial voters were very much behind bernie sanders in the last election or primaries, let's see if they stick with him. they have a lot more to choose from this time around. that debate about socialism will be from president trump or bernie sanders. >> would you tell him to back

away from that label? >> no, not at all. if you remember in the last campaign we went to georgetown and gave a speech about what he meant by socialism. it is the continuation of the new deal franklin roosevelt once laid out. i wouldn't run from it at all. i would clarify what i mean by it in terms of medicare for all. $15 an hour minimum wage. the ideas are in his agenda. >> bernie sanders stayed in the race by the bitter end. it was very very bitter by 2016, in the democratic primary. do you think if he goes through this primary process with a chunk of the support he is likely to get. you've already seen those donors and that support in those polls and he goes into that convention, is he going to get out of the race if it's clear

he's not going to be the nominee or is he going to stay and fight on the floor if the argument is, it's better for the party if you get out. he already said in new hampshire a day or two ago he would endorse and support whoever the nominee was. the nominee happens at the convention. >> you also remember at the convention, we fought very hard to keep minority planks off the floor, convinced our delegates not to do that. i think bernie sanders doesn't get enough credit for the effort he made to bring the party both before the convention and at the convention. >> why didn't he drop out before the convention? >> there were millions of supporters on down the line. he said from the beginning, just like hillary clinton did in a previous campaign, he was going all the way to california. if it was okay for hillary clinton to go all the way to california in the final contest against barack obama, it certainly was for hillary clinton.

>> do you think that primary was why hillary clinton lost to donald trump? >> i don't. barack obama and hillary clinton ran in a spirited primary. that energized people. there were other reasons for a loss. i wouldn't even blame secretary clinton. the whole democratic party didn't pay enough attention to rural america and their economy is changing with a digital economy and we need to reach them and say here are the pathways for a 21st century economy. one of the reasons mark's arguments won't work, they called barack obama a social list and fdr a social list. you have someone representing silicon valley and apple, trust me, we believe in entrepreneurship and believe in some of senator sanders economy to prepare us for a 21st century economy. when you look at investing with people and what it will take to invest with people. >> with all due respect, congressman, you were just here

a second ago saying you want to break up companies. >> no. that was elizabeth warren. >> and private health insurance. >> if you look at his bill, it still allows for private health insurance. >> i have to put a pause on this. thank you all. coming up, what begans a complaints of anti-semitism exposes cracks in both. >> and saturday hirono in hawaii, we will discuss the way they're remaking the country's judicial branch and a recap of the sunday's shows so you don't have to watch. n't have to watch. israel in recent weeks have been

audible members know listening has the power to change us make us better parents, better leaders, better people. and there's no better place to listen than audible. with audible you get a credit good for any audiobook and exclusive fitness and wellness programs. and now, you'll also get two audible originals: titles exclusively produced for audible. automatically roll your credits over to the next month if you don't use them, and if you don't like a book just swap it for free. enjoy 100% ad free listening in the car, on your phone or any connected device. and when you switch a device pick up right where you left off. with our commitment free guarantee, there's never been a better time to start listening to audible. the most inspiring minds, the most compelling stories,

the best place to listen. to start your free 30-day trial, text listen27 to 500500 today. ♪

president trump gives an eyebrow raising speech at mar-a-lago. according to axios he told dmorns that democrats hate jewish people and made a joke about secret service agents in blackface. >> president trump and his former fixer michael cohen go back and forth calling each other liars over a presidential pardon. >> ethiopian airlines flight crashes shortly after takeoff killing all 157 people on board, including eight americans. now investigators are trying to find out what went wrong.