good morning from msnbc world headquarters in new york. it is 7:00 in the east, 4:00 out west. welcome to "weekends with alex witt." alex is off today. i'm phillip mena. new this hour, the democratic field just got more

crowded. who's making it official just now and how could this change the conversation? his car door was opened. he managed to get the other gun and start shooting at me. >> a hero tells his story about confronting a gunman in new zealand while police go on the defense about the response time to the attack. plus, a new theory of how the president could gut mueller's final report, citing executive privilege. but we begin with new details in the attacks on two new zealand mosques. the number of dead has risen to 50. one additional victim was found while officials were clearing the shooting sites. prime minister jacinda ardern confirms that the suspect's apparent manifesto was circulated by e-mail nine minutes before the attack. and survivors are sharing details of their ordeals. >> this burn mark is -- i look on the ground and there was a bullet right next to me, and it

just skimmed my face. it didn't even skim my face. it just went by me and the heat that this. i can only imagine what people who got shot went through. >> nbc's sara james is joining us from christchurch, where it's already after midnight. sarah, officials are getting ready for the first work day since the attack and are now dealing with new concerns. what are you hearing? >> reporter: phillip, what authorities are saying is that the most important issue for them and for everyone here to feel comfortable is public safety. so they're going to be putting an additional 124 police officers on the street here in christchurch to make sure that as people go back to their jobs and as kids go to school, that everybody feels safe and secure. there will also be a police presence at mosques as well. and in the meantime, we've heard more details about exactly what happened, including the way some individuals who were there for services actually responded.

for example, abdul aziz was one of those. he picked up a rifle that the shooter had dropped and confronted him. here's what happened next. >> his car door was open. he managed to get the other gun and start shooting at me. i managed to get in between the cars and get away from his firing. but when i went to the site of the mosque and i saw there was a dead body with a shotgun there, and i just grabbed that shotgun. >> reporter: and basically, what he says is that if he hadn't gotten into that altercation, it couldn even more horrific than it already was. some here in the muslim community are raising questions about the time it took the police to respond, but the police are saying they did everything they could. let's have a listen. >> very upsetting that the police didn't come on time.

17 minutes video i have seen with my own eyes, unfortunately. but there was no one to come in and defend. and the way he came in and killed out and went out and came in and killed again and again, it's quite upsetting. >> six minutes and police staff were on the scene. within ten minutes, members of our armed defenders squad were on scene. and within 36 minutes, we had that mobile offender in our custody. >> reporter: and we actually, phillip, learned a few more details about that. "the new zealand herald" interviewed a couple of the police officers. they had actually been in christchurch from towns not -- some distance away, and they were here for a training session on how to deal with an active shooter. they then learned that there was an active shooter nearby.

they went out and they managed to apprehend him. so we are learning more details all the time. this city, though, is still reeling. people come to the memorial here behind me. they drop off flowers, candles, teddy bears. it's an opportunity for them to come together, and today in just a few hours, as the work day begins, they'll have that first day back at work. phillip? >> all right, sara james reporting from new zealand, thank you 123467. meanwhile, in the u.s. some democratic presidential candidates are condemning president trump for downplaying the nationalism threat. >> i'm not connecting him to any incidents, but i know that that rhetoric is dangerous. >> for him to talk about invaders the day people were shot in new zealand was entirely unacceptable. >> these acts of hatred are on the rise around the western world. they're on the rise right here in this country. now to the 2020 race, and

democrats running for president returning to the campaign trail today. the big news is this hoemt, moments ago, senator kirsten gillibrand made heir campaign for president official. in a new video released exactly at 7:00 a.m. eastern time today. here's a part of her message. >> doesn't pit people against each other. brave doesn't put money over lives. brave doesn't spread hate. cloud truth. >> a lot of it's a hoax. >> build a wall. >> children can be separated -- >> that's what fear does. we can definitely achieve universal health care. we can provide paid family leave for all. end gun violence. pass a green new deal. get money out of politics and take back our democracy. i took your lead. i chose brave, too. >> joining me now, julia manchester, reporter for "the hill," and jonathan allen, national political reporter for nbc news digital.

all right, i want to start with you, julia. what do you make of this kirsten gillibrand announcement? how does it change the equation? where does she fit in? >> well, she fits in by the fact that she is a woman entering this very crowded and increasingly really diverse field. i think kirsten gillibrand brings a lot to the table coming from her political history, if you will, you know. she started out as a congresswoman from the capital region of new york, so more seen as a centrist democrat. however, once she became a senator, she shifted her politics more to the left in order to encompass all of new york's really liberal democratic vote. so, she'll bring i guess a plethora of policies to that table and i think she'll take some hits from the increasingly progressive field for some of her past stances on issues such as gun control, for example. however, to her gender, i think she brings quite a bit to the table in that regard. we've seen her talk about how she wants to fight for america's children like they're her own.

we've seen a lot of talk of motherhood in her campaign and how she's willing to fight for women's issues. so i think she is yet another female candidate bringing women's issues to the front and center of the 2020 democratic field. >> jonathan, i wanted to get your reaction. >> well, i think it's interesting. senator gillibrand is trying to gain traction in this race, something she's not been able to do during the exploratory phase. she rubbed a lot of democrats the wrong way with her push to get rid of senator al franken, if you remember, during the controversy over allegations of sexual assault against him. and i think what's going on here is her trying to really own the narrative of what she's done in congress, including that and saying, look, i'm somebody who's out there in bold, i'm somebody who's out there going to take positions. i will take some arrows for that. there are going to be people who aren't always comfortable with what i'm doing, and what i'm doing is brave, and you heard

that word brave. and i think what she's arguing is that you need somebody like her, somebody who's willing to ruffle some feathers in order to get some things done. whether or not that ends up being what the democratic electorate wants or whether or not she's able to gain traction with that message, she's certainly taking a bold approach to that and trying i think to answer some of those questions and trying to put that in the light which she sees it, which her supporters see it, which is that she has been brave. she took on a lot of people in military, took on a lot of people on capitol hill in trying to push forward with reforming the rules around the investigations of sexual assault and rape in the military. that was not an easy fight for her to take on. she took on some seriously entrenched powers. and even though that's not something she had in that ad, that's certainly part of the narrative and fits into that sort of brave image that she's trying to portray. >> jonathan, julia, stick around for just a second. i want to get your take on the other big story of the morning.

right now i want to toss it to mike viqueira. he joins us from the white house. mike, the president tweeted about john mccain. what was that all about? that came out of the blue. what was behind that? >> reporter: well, let's remember that john mccain has left us now seven months gone. of course, he was the 2008 republican nominee for the preside president. he is considered a war hero, having spent almost seven years as a war prisoner by the north vietnamese. that didn't keep the president from attacking him in the 2016 campaign, saying i like people who weren't captured. and since especially getting under the president's skin, that vote since repealing obamacare where mccain famously gave that thumbs down on the senate floor. president trump now seeing something on media, as he is want to do. this from ken starr. and this is what the president tweeted just a few hours ago -- "spreading the fake and totally discredited dossier is unfortunately a very dark stain against senator john mccain.

ken starr, former independent counsel. he had far worse stains than this, including thumbs down on repeal and replace after years of campaigning to repeal and replace. remember, that vote was against repealing, not replacing. and so, donald trump taking out after john mccain because it's something that ken starr said. we should note that ken starr is the former independent counsel. he believes that a sitting president can be indicted, and he said that in the context of the mueller investigation. but now meghan mccain hitting back, of course, the daughter of john mccain, so famously eulogizing her father at the funeral in washington. she says "no one will ever love you the way they loved my father. i wish i had been given more saturdays with him. maybe spend yours with your family instead of on twitter obsessing over mine?" so an ugly back-and-forth. meghan mccain really hitting back at president trump over this latest attack on john mccain.

phillip? >> mike viqueira joining us from the white house. thank you for filling us in, mike. all right, jonathan, what do you think of the president? why is he going after senator mccain months after he died? >> the president doesn't have a lot of self-control when it comes to john mccain or really any other subject. he gets a burr in his saddle and decides to hit twitter to relieve the pain. i mean, i don't think there's anything more complicated to it than that. >> all right. do you anticipate any reaction from congress here, especially those who were close to john mccain, people like lindsey graham for example? >> yeah, lindsey graham was first person that really came to mind. we've seen that ever since president trump took office, lindsey graham, who was a bit of a vocal opponent of his during the republican 2016 primary, has really fallen in line with president trump, especially since he became senate judiciary, the head of the senate judiciary committee. so you know, i see maybe a slap

on the wrist, but i don't think the republican party is really going to change in that they're going to slam president trump more for this. i don't think it's going to make much of a difference. >> since we're on senator graham, jonathan, this week the house almost unanimously passed the bill urging public closure of the mueller report. four members voted present. but then senator lindsey graham blocked the senate from even taking it up, even though the president tweeted that all republicans should vote for transparency. so, jonathan, why did senator graham do this? >> well, i think maybe we're looking at it backward here a little bit. >> okay. >> i think the president was willing to tweet that all the republicans should vote for transparency because he knew that when it came to senate that this was not going to go forward. so, why not tweet that it was perfectly fine with him that the house republicans all said that the mueller report should be made public. i mean, this is a president who said that the mueller investigation shouldn't have happened in the first place. this is not somebody who wants the mueller report made public.

this is someone who's been calling it a witch hunt from day one, someone who has not treated this as something that was going to exonerate him. if it is something that does exonerate him, at the end it will end up looking like very bad strategy to have not embraced it in the first place. so, i think perhaps he didn't see around the corner that lindsey graham would be able to help him by blocking this in the senate or that mitch mcconnell, the senate majority leader, ultimately would be able to block it for him in the senate, but now he's in the position of simply saying it's okay with him that house republicans essentially went against him and said that the mueller report should be made public. >> so, graham and mcconnell just shielding him for good measure. julia, what was the reaction from fellow senate republicans? >> yeah, i think a lot of senate republicans would fall in line with this move. you know, i don't think president trump obviously wants this report to be made public. and i also don't think attorney general william barr would necessarily release a lot of salacious material if that was found in this report. it's interesting because we've

actually -- you know, it seems like we've gotten so many tidbits from this mueller investigation really made out in the public. however, it will ultimately be up to the attorney general as to what to release. and i don't think he's necessarily going to release anything juicy, if you will, but i don't think republicans necessarily want the president to have this major stain in terms of what the outcome of the russia investigation looks like going forward. i think they would rather move on and focus on other policy initiatives. >> all right, julia manchester, jonathan allen, thank you both for joining us this morning. >> thank you. new questions about executive privilege and whether it can help the president gut the mueller report. elp the pres the mueller report guys go through a lot to deal with shave irritation. so, we built the new gillette skinguard with a specialized guard designed to reduce it. because we believe all men deserve a razor just for them. the best a man can get. gillette. at&t provides edge-to-edge intelligence, covering virtually every part of your healthcare business.

so that if she has a heart problem & the staff needs to know, they will & they'll drop everything can you take a look at her vitals? & share the data with other specialists yeah, i'm looking at them now. & they'll drop everything hey. & take care of this baby yeah, that procedure seems right. & that one too. at&t provides edge to edge intelligence. it can do so much for your business, the list goes on and on. that's the power of &. & when your patient's tests come back...

this and even this.hark, i deep clean messes like this. but i don't have to clean this, because the self-cleaning brush roll removes hair, while i clean. - [announcer] shark, the vacuum that deep cleans, now cleans itself. a wealth of information. a wealth of perspective. ♪ a wealth of opportunities. that's the clarity you get from fidelity wealth management. straightforward advice, 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. i found a companyeans to who believes in me.rt. they look out for me. and they help me grow my career. at comcast it's my job to constantly monitor our network, prevent problems, and to help provide the most reliable service possible. my name is tanya, i work at the network operations center for comcast. we're working to make things simple, easy and awesome.

new questions today surrounding the president's attempts to discredit the mueller investigation after he reupped his attacks denouncing the investigation as illegal and suggesting there should be no report. a new op ed in "the hill" raises the question of executive privilege and whether he can still gut mueller's final report. joining me now is msnbc legal analyst danny cevallos and criminal defense attorney ashleigh merchant. that article says that the president can argue that speaking with mueller is not a waiver since the special counsel is part of the justice department, which is a part of the executive branch. is this question of privilege an argument that's going to hold up? >> i think it could. there's two different types of

presidential privilege that could an certified here. there's one that's sort of a decision-making privilege that the president has, and that one's very easily overcome when there's conduct that is alleged to have been misconduct, an allegation like we have here. what's a lot more difficult and what the president can assert and is not as likely to overcome is this other type of privilege, which is a communications type privilege, and that is governing and protecting privileged information that is communicated by the executive branch to the executive branch. and since the justice department is part of the executive branch, that privilege is likely to protect the president's actual communications if he wants to assert it. so, it's something that if the president wants to assert, he will likely be able to keep that type of communication out of the public eye. >> and danny, under federal law, could this affect the attorney general and his decision to release specific details about the mueller report? >> it could, but the reality is that congress and barr, the attorney general, everyone has indicated a willingness to

release the report. but the real question is president trump's unilateral invocation of this executive privilege. and this privilege dates all the way back to marbury v. madison, where chief justice marshall suggested that we really can't allow an invasion into the inner workings of the president and his cabinet. if you think about presidential privilege that way, it's much more cabinet, it's much more limited. so it's interesting to see where a court will go. the only real thing we know about executive privilege from the supreme court is that it exists. we don't really know the contours and extent of that privilege. >> it's vague. ashleigh, an appeals court in new york ruled that trump must answer civil charges filed by summer zervos, who accused the president of sexual misconduct. the editorial board at "the new york times" says, "the legal travails of president clinton may soon haunt president trump." ashleigh, can we expect a

deposition from the president? and what happens if he resists? >> the president can be deposed in this case, and that's what the new york appellate court was saying. they were saying that just like president clinton had to stand to a sexual harassment suit by paula jones, same can happen to trump. he has to have to defend himself in this case, so he can be deposed and brought to court. he is not above the legal process in this civil case. and so, what the court of appeals in the new york district has said is that the president does not have a state protection. he is actually not immune from civil suit. and so, he can have to come to court just like other litigants in civil cases. >> danny, one former federal prosecutor told politico that the signs point towards mueller wrapping up, that we're probably a few weeks away from a final report, but, quote, certainly a fairly complete draft is already being circulated inside the mueller team. do you see mueller finishing his investigation without any new indictments, especially of don junior or jerome corsi? >> back in november there was a source that said the mueller

investigation would wrap up at the end of february. february has come and gone, and now there are new suggestions that the mueller team is wrapping up. and as someone who has defended federal criminal cases, one thing that the federal government often does not do is wrap things up quickly or ahead of schedule or even on schedule. they will be finished when they are finished. and with each new indictment, with each new search warrant, with each new document or tie a terabyte of data that's uncovered is a potential new avenue for the investigation. that doesn't mean that they may not be wrapping up soon, but a general rule of thumb is they will be finished after the date that you think they will be finished. >> ashleigh, what do you think? >> i think that they are wrapping up but i do agree, i think that when they're done, they're done. but the problem is that we've seen a lot of key folks and key players in this investigation being reassigned to different divisions, so that's indicative

that they may be wrapping up because they are letting some of the key players move on to other cases. so, i think we are nearing the final stages. >> all right. the president's budget plan, what it could mean -- thank you both for joining us this morning. >> thank you. >> that was danny cevallos and ashleigh merchant joining us. all right, coming up, the president's budget plan and what it could mean for middle and low-income families. the house committee budget chair joined me to explain. e house cor joined me to explain essential for pine trees, but maybe not for people with rheumatoid arthritis. because there are options. like an "unjection™". xeljanz xr. a once-daily pill for adults with moderate to severe ra for whom methotrexate did not work well enough. xeljanz xr can reduce pain, swelling and further joint damage, even without methotrexate. xeljanz xr can lower your ability to fight infections,

including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections and cancers, including lymphoma have happened. as have tears in the stomach or intestines, serious allergic reactions, low blood cell counts, higher liver tests and cholesterol levels. don't start xeljanz xr if you have an infection. your doctor should perform blood tests before and while taking xeljanz xr, and monitor certain liver tests. tell your doctor if you've been somewhere fungal infections are common and if you have had tb, hepatitis b or c, or are prone to infections. needles. fine for some things. but for you, one pill a day may provide symptom relief. ask your doctor about xeljanz xr. an "unjection™". hey, who are you? oh, hey jeff, i'm a car thief... what?! i'm here to steal your car because, well, that's my job. what? what?? what?! (laughing) what?? what?! what?! [crash] what?! haha, it happens. and if you've got cut-rate car insurance, paying for this could feel like getting robbed twice.

so get allstate... and be better protected from mayhem... like me. ♪

tomorrow the trump administration is set to release more details about the president's budget proposal. it seeks $8.6 billion for a border wall, while democrats say it's cutting hundreds of billions of dollars in programs such as medicare and medicaid, food stamps, loan forgiveness, and the pell grant. joining me, chairman of the house budget committee, representative john yermuth. you tweeted a photo in which you changed the title of the budget from better america to declining america. is there any common ground here on this budget you can find? >> well, there are a few things in the budget that i think democrats would support. the president proposed making an

investment in infrastructure. i think it was very inadequate, but at least it showed a commitment to doing that, and we're very much committed to rebuilding our roads, bridges, water systems, broadband, so forth. so we'd like to pursue that. there was a substantial investment proposed in cybersecurity which i think is incredibly important. we certainly want to do that. there was an investment in modernizing the technology in the federal government. we have agencies which are using 30-year-old computers. that doesn't serve the public very well. so, yes, there are some areas of common ground. but on the basic proposition of values, the budget is woefully short as far as we're concerned. >> the "washington post" gives the democratic outrage over the medicare cuts two pinocchios because most of the cuts from medicare will come from health providers and not patients, and that these cuts make medicare more efficient. what's your reaction to that? >> well, part of that's true. it's kind of ironic, because back in 2009 and early '10 when

we were debating the affordable care act, the republicans were all bashing us for cutting $750 billion out of medicare, which we weren't doing either. we weren't proposing any cuts in care. but that's not totally true of the republican cuts. and on the medicaid side, which i'm particularly concerned about because of my state, i finally got the acting director to admit that people would lose coverage under the proposal that they've made for medicaid. there's also a cut in social security disability payments. these are things that the president said he would never touch, and unfortunately, he's breaking that promise. >> also want to get your reaction to the acting budget chief defending the president's budget proposal. let's listen to that. >> washington has a spending problem, and it endangers the future prosperity of our nation for generations to come. this budget contains nearly $2.7

trillion in savings, more spending reductions proposed than any administration in history. this budget will balance in 15 years. >> congressman, is that true? >> well, it's not likely. one of the things that they're doing is they're projecting consistent growth in the economy at 3%. there's virtually no economist in the country that's projecting that kind of growth. cb son cbo is somewhere around 1.9% over that window, so the assumptions they make i think are very flawed and overly optimistic. yeah, they do cut a lot out of spending. but what's interesting about that is the spending that the congress has annual control over, what we call discretionary spending, hasn't really risen at all in the last nine years. that's when you count for inflation. what the increase in spending is because we have a huge

demographic problem in the country. shouldn't call it a problem. it's aging population. 10,000 seniors a day becoming eligible for social security and medicare. so, on the mandatory spending side of the budget, we do have a problem. but the republicans never want to admit that we have a revenue problem. in fact, in late 2017, they doubled down on that and cut taxes and added $2 trillion to the deficit. in this budget, again they extend some of the tax cuts that were scheduled to expire in 2025. that adds another $1 trillion to the debt. so we have always maintained, let's deal with spending, but let's also deal with the revenue side and stop giving tax cuts to people and corporations that don't need them. >> and the democrats have not set forth their own proposal yet, is that correct? >> that's correct. we have not. and we're working on that now. we've had a proposal many, the past few years. i think we know where we want to go. we have a very diverse caucus

these days, and it's hard to see how we can get 218 votes for any particular budget plan on the floor, but we're working to try to do that. >> daunting task, for sure. >> yeah, it is. >> on friday, congressman, you expressed concerns about the green new deal. you told a radio station that it will be, quote, very hard to justify it on budgetary grounds. what did you mean by that? is it even possible to estimate how much the green new deal is going to cost? >> it's not possible. and of course, the green new deal is aspirational. it's basically a utopian plan for the country. you can't argue with utopia. everybody would like that. but for instance, the green new deal actually asked for or proposes renovating every structure in the united states within ten years to become energy efficient. aside from the legal problems with that and jurisdictional issues, zoning and so forth, there's no way to estimate what

making every structure in the country energy efficient would be. there's guaranteed income proposals, a job for every american. i don't know how you actually evaluate that in a fiscal sense. so again, the goals in the green new deal admirable. i think we all support them on the democratic side, but in terms of trying to assess what it would mean for the budget, it's impossible to do. it would be expensive. >> do you think you could get a unanimous vote on utopia? are you sure about that? even that? >> you're probably right. >> there would be a few votes of descent. >> probably not. >> i also want to get your take on the impeachment. house speaker nancy pelosi says it only should be pursued if it's overwhelmingly bipartisan that they would have to go forward with that. do you agree with that? i think the speaker makes a very valid point. i have a little bit different take on impeachment, though.

i believe that if there is clear evidence that, not necessarily proof, but evidence that the president of the united states committed crimes or misdemeanors, which i think there already is, then i think we have an obligation to initiate impeachment proceedings. if we don't, then i think impeachment becomes meaningless. the founding fathers put the impeachment provision in the constitution for a reason. and again, i think i can't see how we could ignore that. so in my opinion, it's not iquestion of whether we will initiate proceedings, it's a question of when. and when may be exactly when the speaker describes -- the way she describes it, and that's when there is clear and compelling evidence. i already think there is, but you know, we haven't convinced enough people yet. >> all right, congressman john yarmuth, thank you so much for your time this morning. >> thanks, phillip. we are just getting started on this sunday, this st. patrick's day. and at the top of the hour, we'll have a roundtable discussion on "up with david gura." and david's got a look at what's

coming up on "up." david? >> happy st. patrick's day to you as well. there is a new piece in "new york" looking at the way the president leans on his advisers. a writer for that magazine actually tried to track down president trump's rolodex to see who he's calling late at night from the oval office. and while she didn't get the physical thing, she did get a better sense of who he's speed dialing night after night after night after night. so she's going to join us about that, how you get access to, how you sway this president of the united states. and then we've talked an awful lot about primaries in the context of democrats. now there's a growing conversation about primaries and republicans. jeb bush, former governor of florida who ran against donald trump back in 2016, spoke yesterday, and he suggested it would be a good thing for the republican party, a good thing to have a conversation about conservatism with some other candidates challenging president trump in 2020. jeremy peters, who covers republican party politics for "the new york times," is going to join us for that conversation, which again is taking place on "up" here in just a few minutes. >> all right, looking forward to that, david.

thank you, sir. there is a call on capitol hill to take action in response to the college admissions cheating scandal, but what can washington do to ensure college-bound students don't get unfairly squeezed out? get unfairly squeezed out? you need insurance. but it's not really something you want to buy. it's not sexy. or delicious. or fun. but since you need both car and home insurance, why not bundle them with esurance and save up to 10%? which you can spend on things you really want to buy, like... well, i don't know what you'd wanna buy because i'm just a guy on your tv. esurance. it's surprisingly painless. guys do whatever it takes to deal with shave irritation. so, we re-imagined the razor with the new gillette skinguard. it has a unique guard between the blades. that's designed to reduce irritation during the shave.

because we believe all men deserve a razor just for them. the best a man can get. gillette.

so, i started with the stats regarding my moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. like how humira has been prescribed to over 300,000 patients. and how many patients saw clear or almost clear skin in just 4 months - the kind of clearance that can last. humira targets and blocks a specific source of inflammation that contributes to symptoms. numbers are great. and seeing clearer skin is pretty awesome, too. that's what i call a body of proof. humira can lower your ability to fight infections. serious and sometimes fatal infections, including tuberculosis, and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened, as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections,

or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. want more proof? ask your dermatologist about humira. this is my body of proof. thousands of people may now be able to join a class-action lawsuit against some of the nation's top universities after dozens of parents and students were charged in a massive college admissions scandal. now the ones in charge of

reviewing applications are weighing in. nbc talked to two former admissions officers who worked at elite schools, and they explain that some of the problems with the system, one of them saying the college process is so huge with so many different moving parts, so i have no expectation that it's going to be purely meritocratic. if something is done that exposes that the process is not, then i'm not surprised. michael dannenberg is director of strategic initiatives for policy at education reform now, and former aide to senator ted kennedy. michael, do you agree with the way that admissions officer characterized the process? what are the challenges in the effort here to make college admissions fair? >> well, i think it's correct that a lot of college admissions process isn't fair, doesn't reward diversity -- doesn't promote diversity, doesn't reward merit. in terms of challenges, i guess there are two -- money and power. colleges maintain processes and preferences like the legacy

preference or donor preferences because they think it will bring in more money and they continue with sort of shadow emissions system called early decision because they think that will have to pay out less in financial aid to those students who come in through it. and power because, you know, a lot of members of congress have gone to these schools, their staff, and that holds at state legislators as well. their staff have lobbied on behalf of donors and other favored applicants. so, those are i think the two major challenges, are money and power. but i think both are possible to be overcome. you know, we're seeing this with respect to power, the latter, we're seeing this kind of antiestablishment wave in congress, a whole new set of members who don't come in with the same sort of old boy networks with respect to donor preferences or just a view on politics. and with respect to money, i think we're seeing more and more

donors start to condition their donations to institutions based on how the institutions are doing with respect to diversity and achievement in admissions and enrollment. >> michael, do you think these top-tier schools are going to take a hit in terms of reputation or even enrollment because of their ties to this scandal? >> i don't think they'll take a hit with respect to enrollment. as far as reputation, it depends how you look at it, but their reputations with respect to academic quality i don't think are going to go down. their reputation in terms of integrity may go down because this scandal has lifted the veil on an underlying corruption in the college admissions system. >> an article in the "wall street journal" explains how this scandal is prompting a response from congress. senators are planning to reintroduce bipartisan

legislation that would fine universities that have the smallest percentage of low-income students. what do you think of that idea? >> well, i think the bill you're talking about was introduced by senator chris coons, democrat of delaware, and it basically seeks to hold institutions of higher education accountable for not just racial diversity but socioeconomic diversity and to help institutions that are doing well on those fronts but are struggling. and i think that's a great idea. it's got promise. it's the kind of thing that should be embraced in state legislatures. and really, when it comes to the whole college admissions, and frankly, college accountability issue, what you need in congress is for one person, or in state legislature, one person to force a vote, because i think whether there is a public vote on these matters, members of congress don't want to be on the wrong side of what's right. >> and michael, what do you think's going to happen to students whose parents were implicated in this scandal? do you think they should be allowed to remain enrolled at

those schools? >> you know, i don't. if they got in through fraudulent means, false pretenses, then whether they knew about it or not, it doesn't really matter. it's something that was untrue that went forward in the application process, and you know, they should, i'm afraid, have to suffer the consequences for an ill-gotten gain. but the real enemy here is -- i mean, the real victims here are not those 50-odd students. the real victims are the scores, millions of students who don't get a fair shot at a lot of these elite institutions. this case involved 50 indictments. 50% of the seats at elite colleges and universities are taken up by students who get a preference through the legacy preference or get a benefit through the early decision process, both of which are

overwhelmingly go to white students and overwhelmingly benefit students from upper-income families. >> well, now we're seeing lawsuits because of it. michael dannenburg, thank you so much for your time this morning. >> thank you for having me. why joe biden could be president trump's biggest 2020 nightmare. but could beto o'rourke be a close second? beto o'rourke be a close second ♪ one plus one equals too little too late ♪ ♪ a sock-a-bam-boom ♪ who's in the room? ♪ love is dangerous ♪ but driving safe means you pay less ♪ ♪ switch and save ♪ yes, ma'am excuse me, miss. ♪ does this heart belong to you? ♪ ♪ would you like it anyway? [ scatting ]

- [woman] with shark's duoay? clean, i don't just clean, ♪ i deep clean carpets and floors, so i got this. yep, this too, and this, please. even long hair and pet hair are no problem, but the one thing i won't have to clean is this because the shark's self-cleaning brush roll removes the hair wrap while i clean. ♪ - [announcer] shark, the vacuum that deep cleans now cleans itself. mimini was born extraordinary, with more power for more fun. mini was born to do the only thing we ever wanted to do.

drive. to hit start and just go. fast and far. around town and around hairpins. to leave everyone in the dust, and leave rubber on the road. because mini was born to drive. drive for yourself at the mini born to drive sales event. special offers at your local mini dealer. ♪

our mission is to make offshore wind one of the principal new sources of energy. not every bank is willing to get involved in a first-of-its-kind project. citi saw the promise of clean energy. we're polluting the air less. businesses and homes can rely on a steady source of power. this will be the first of many offshore wind farms in the u.s. ♪ ♪

we need a leader who makes -- >> big. >> we need a leader who makes big, bold choices. >> someone not afraid of progress. >> that's why i'm running for progress. >> and why i'm asking you for your support. our anthem asks everyone to make a choice. >> kirsten gillibrand making her kick-off official. first major speech of the campaign this weekend. bishop garrison, for public policy and republican strategist, republican darling, founder and president of liberty government affairs. bishop, what stands out to you

about gillibrand's rollout this morning? >> thank you for having me. she will be another voice, a very strong one in terms of the progressive type of values that voters want to see from the left. i think her record speaks for itself on the hill. she's going to be a tremendous leader. you have a lot of great staffers that think the world of her. you have a lot of her con st constituency that wants to see her take on donald trump and reemphasize what true american values are internationally as well. >> what do you make of her references to donald trump in that video and plans for that speech next weekend? >> democrats want someone who will fight back against donald trump, but if you're a democrat you may be worried that senator

gillibrand will be hillary 2.0. she's running to the platform of democratic socialism, supports a green new deal, all the policies that the left has gravitated towards, which means she's not going to be unique in this race and that may be a problem. you have all the candidates gravitating to the far left wing agenda, that doesn't allow them to distinguish themselves and be different. >> if i could add, though, she has fought incredibly fiercely for sexual assault victims, particularly in the military, to seek true reform. she's done that for years now to, honestly, the consternation, at times of senior officials. i think that in itself is a good starting point for her. you bring up socialist values and the american people care

about health care, tax reform, a trillion dollar hole in the budget right knew nou due to this administration's actions. i don't think it's socialists. i think it's people wanting real change. >> it will be $2 trillion if democrats have their ways. senator rand paul, she has worked with, on the military sexual harassment issue. maybe she will be able to distinguish herself but i fear that this far-left won't help the democrats. >> talking about a former vp -- >> they're always closer than ever. >> no one closer than former vice president joe biden. listen to what he had to say yesterday. >> i know i get criticized by the new left. i had the most progressive record of anybody running for -- anybody who would run.

i didn't mean -- of anybody who would run. >> what do you think, bishop, freudian slip there? >> remains to be seen. if the vice president decides to enter in this race, he is a compelling candidate for people across the board and across the aisle. the past eight years and his previous experiences as a leader in the senate, you clearly have an individual that has a record that he can really point to and show individuals how strong he is for the type of values that our voters want to see. >> do you agree that he would be the most progressive person that would be running? >> i think that's why we have

debates. i think there's a lot of conversation around that. i think it's definitely not outside the realm of possibility, given a lot of what he has done and helped to accomplish. he helped to accomplish the repeal of don't ask, don't tell. he helped to appeal and pass obamacare. he helped to put in a lot of efforts around climate regulation that people really enjoyed. so, i don't doubt what the vice president is saying. i just think there's a good reason we have these types of thorough debates. you'll have a dozen debates on the democratic side that will get to the heart of that issue. >> politico in an article behind closed doors, the president has fixated on biden. trying to assure their boss that the president is doomed. do you think they're writing off joe biden too easily? how worried would they be about joe bide snen. >> the staffers may be right,

that the party -- there's no room for moderates in the party. look what happened to howard schultz? he had to run as an independent. he's clearly a centrist democrat. the democratic party, do they have room for centrist establishments, democrats? we'll find out, if joe biden can do well. >> howard schultz is not a democrat. >> we'll have to take this up another time, gentlemen. brian darling, bishop garrison, thank you for joining us. >> thanks. why should americans care about brexit. about brexit ♪ unstopables in-wash scent booster ♪ downy unstopables you wouldn't accept an incomplete job from any one else. why accept it from your allergy pills? flonase sensimist relieves all your worst symptoms, including nasal congestion, which most pills don't. and all from a gentle mist

you can barely feel. flonase sensimist. you can barely feel. uh uh, i deliver the news around here.... sources say liberty mutual customizes your car insurance, so you only pay for what you need. over to you, logo. liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ about 50% of people with evesevere asthma k?

have too many cells called eosinophils in their lungs. eosinophils are a key cause of severe asthma. fasenra is designed to target and remove these cells. fasenra is an add-on injection for people 12 and up with asthma driven by eosinophils. fasenra is not a rescue medicine or for other eosinophilic conditions. fasenra is proven to help prevent severe asthma attacks, improve breathing, and can lower oral steroid use. fasenra may cause allergic reactions. get help right away if you have swelling of your face, mouth, and tongue, or trouble breathing. don't stop your asthma treatments unless your doctor tells you to. tell your doctor if you have a parasitic infection or your asthma worsens. headache and sore throat may occur. haven't you missed enough? ask an asthma specialist about fasenra. if you can't afford your medication, astrazeneca may be able to help.

all of you. how you live, what you love. that's what inspired us to create america's most advanced internet. internet that puts you in charge. that protects what's important. it handles everything, and reaches everywhere. this is beyond wifi, this is xfi. simple. easy. awesome.

xfinity, the future of awesome. that will do it for me this hour on "weekends with alex witt." now it's time for "up with david gura." >> up on a sunday morning, i'm david gura. there is a long-running joke about vice president joe biden's propensity for gaffes. is that what happened last night? >> i have the most progressive record for anybody running for the united states -- anybody who would run. >> is that a slip of the tongue? his supporters continue to ask, what is the hold up? plus senator kirsten gillibrand announces, introducing herself as --

>>