all right. that wraps up this hour of msnbc live. i'll see you guys right here tomorrow at 6:00 eastern. now it's time for "up" with david gura. ♪ this is "up" i'm david gura and president trump is doubling down on his attacks against the so-called squad of house democrats. he's saying his racist attacks were warranted.

>> when they call our country garbage, i don't care about politics. i don't care if it's good or bad about politics. the united states is sending hundreds of troops to saudi arabia as tensions rise after iran seizes a british tanker claiming it was not in compliance with international law. >> each of these incidents in isolation are not especially alarming. in the aggregate they are. >> and the country gets ready for a slow burn. a dangerous heat emergency today throughout much of the united states affecting roughly 170 million people. >> the heat index is looking to grow to 96 degrees. >> it feels like i'm sitting in a saunsauna. >> it's saturday, july 20th, and president trump it in bedminster this weekend because he has nothing but time on his hands. >> we have all night. we can have a lot of fun tonight.

i don't have time to go with three different names. we'll go cortes. >> man, you literally told us you had nothing to do. >> up with me is don calloway, along with emily tisch sussman and david corn. with us from washington is eugene scott, a political reporter for the "washington post." this is a week defined by president trump's racist remarks online and at a campaign rally. as you read those remarks and listen to them and think about them in the context of this country's history, you think about what they say about our politics and this country today, recognize those ugly attacks tell us a lot about the future. how this president will wage his campaign for reeke wh-electiore. president trump appears to have settled on a strategy, liz

goodwin writes, his new playbook looks a lot by the old playbook. by now you know what he wrote and said, that tweet directing those congress women to go back and fix the broken and charime infested places from which they came and then a battle cry that lasted 13 seconds. >> i started speaking very quickly. it really was -- i disagree with it, by the way, it was quite a chant. i felt a little bit badly about it. i will say this, i did and i started speaking quickly. it started out rather fast as you probably know. >> for that event in my homestate of north carolina, the "washington post" put it plainly. president trump wants to frame election around a nationalistic message that inflamed racial tensions across the country. don, let's exhale if we could. take stock of what happened over the course of this week.

we'll talk about all of this. what did this week -- what changed this week to you? >> i was raised by parents from alabama. this is immediately reminiscent of a george wallace, people standing at the front door of the university of alabama. if you're not terrified by this it's because it doesn't present a threat to who you are and your being in this country. shocking and scary. it's not a surprise that the president is a racist. should not be a surprise to any thinking adult. i'm not one to ascribe strategy to this president where it's clear he has none, however he is in full campaign mode, has a staff and apparatus and it's clear this is what they'll do going into 2020 but specifically this is what they consider to do. consider ilhan omar a proxy and a warm up for kamala harris.

>> eugene scott, pick it up from there. back in 2015 the strategy was chaos. maybe overleafed with stuff of the likes we saw this week. your thinking about the president's strategy? >> not much. it's something we have seen something often in this presidency. the president says something, his surrogates and aides try to clean it up and make it sound as if it was not as problematic as many critics have identified. the president just goes back and says no, actually i meant it as badly as i originally said. that's why we've seen him walk back his disavow less than four days after doing it. we know, we have data that shows that a significant percentage of trump supporters backed him because they had cultural anxieties about what it meant to be america, the changes in america. what they displayed this past week in embracing the chants, send her back, a chant inspired

by his original tweets is very much showing that make america great again really just means make america white again. >> emily, about this i grew up in north carolina, i know pitt county, it's a county that didn't go for donald trump in the last election. it went to hillary clinton by a fairly substantial margin. what is your sense, if this is the strategy, of how it will resonate in a place like that? >> i don't think he cares how it plays in places he didn't win last time. this is truly campaigning on identity politics at his strongest. he is saying it is making america white again. it feels he feels most comfortable when digging in on race and creating the biggest possible divisions. it's a place he thrives and gets into his groove, which is terrifying to a lot of

americans. they take it personally. they know what it means. i think people who are not necessarily at the brunt of it right now know that they could be next. i see a lot of people organizing in the jewish community saying it's them now, it could be us next. this is definitely the strategy, whether it's a decisive strategy or not, i'm not sure i agree with you. it's where he feels comfortable. so he will lean in. i'm honestly not sure we should be holding democratic candidates to the standard that we held obama to, that we held many candidates to, to say are they unifying enough? trump doesn't care. >> you heard tom perez. i was fascinated by this. tom perez saying there's no pretense of trying to win over the voters in that arena. you described this as a clarifying moment. what i love in the piece you wrote, you go back to the history here. we're talking about the presidency and the agency he has on matters like this. we'll have ellie on tomorrow, he

talked about the trump courts, he didn't pick these judges. he is carrying water for the party that's wanted to do this for a long time. you write about the racial history of the republican party in a similar framework. >> this week was clarifying. i'm glad it's out in the open and news organizations can say the president did a racist tweet, if you do that, you're probably a racist. you go back decades, you go back to the southern strategy during the nixon years, that was basically trying to exploit white haven'tme meresentment an issues. you had ronald reagan going after wealthier people, talking about states rights, trying to get white voters into the republican party, more eventually in the '90s, you had newt gingrich putting out a memo

to republican candidates saying forget about policy battles with your democratic foes, you need to demonize them. how do you do that? he gave them words to use. pathetic. bizarre. radical, traitors. he advocated calling democrats traitors. so you have this basically fusion of racial politics and the politics of demonization. and in the last few years with the tea party you had sarah palin saying that barack obama, the first major african-american presidential nominee palled around with terrorists. you had the birther movement, which trump led, saying he wasn't really an american. you even had people in mitt romney's campaign, they kept saying he doesn't understand america. you know, he's not really american. so you had all this leading up to the trump moment. so this is not an annerration. this is a culmination.

>> to that point, you look at the republican response to all of this. if this is not a concrete strategy from the president, you see republicans treating it as such. that's what we saw in the response this week. >> i think there's no further debate that this is the party of trump. there's no republican identity outside of him. if you consider a big picture idea here, joy reid led opt thought all week that campaign time came around real quick. i have not brought back your jobs to scranton and schenectady. my tariffs have hurt your farms and factories. i have not brought back opportunity for all. the stock market is good, but not everybody on main street is feeling it. what i can protect is the most important commodity you can have, your whiteness in this country. i will show those folks don't have it, i'm here for you, because with that you can still be the one-legged busboy. that's the most important commodity. i have not brought back the

economy, but i will protect that for you. >> how should democrats react to this in light of what he's saying? there's a lot of frustration among republicans not talking about economic issues, not talking about jobs or the employment rate. how do democrats respond to items like we saw this week? >> it's an opportunity for democrats to show they have vision. i do think it provides an opportunity for democrats to say, look, i'm not just counter to him. i'm not just the opposite of him. i have a vision for how to move the country forward. i feel pretty strongly than any democratic nominee cannot just show themselves as a counter to trump. they have to actually show what they would do. and how they would react. i think it's an opportunity to show themselves as presidential and step into that. i do think the democrats up and down the ticket have huge opportunity to show contrast to

any republican up and down the ticket. this is 100% the party of trump. in the last cycle they tried to distance themselves from it. you cannot do it longer. >> just react to what we saw in the house this week, in terms of that democrat-mounted response. you had this resolution condemning those tweets. another resolution could have been made later this week after the comments in greenville, north carolina. what did that show you about that unified response? >> i think it showed us that what the president did, which was his attempt to divide the democratic party after he saw reports about there being tension between the house speaker and more establishment democrats and some more progressive democrats is at the end of the day, when it comes to dismantling white supremacy and pushing back on racism the democratic party wants to be on one page and on the record about being on that one page. despite the few republicans who did disavow the president's words or call them racist or

push back on them, when it came time to vote and make your name known and go down in history as being against these words, very few of them chose to do that. there's a few reasons. one is perhaps because they're afraid of the voters, they know the voter, the base is with donald trump. but also perhaps some of them do agree with the president. we've seen them come out and say you know what? maybe if you don't agree with trumpism you should go back. >> count on one hand. four of them. eugene scott, thank you very much for joining us. a lot more ahead including the kamala harris and joe biden research that we have been waiting for as she chips away at the former vice president's lead. a serious new provocation from iran a day after the u.s. says it destroyed one of its drones. we go to tehran next. mutual customized my an tey car insurance so i only pay for what i need. oh no, no, no, no, no, no, no... only pay for what you need. liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪

prpharmacist recommendedne memory support brand. you can find it in the vitamin aisle in stores everywhere. prevagen. healthier brain. better life.

book two, separate qualifying stays at choicehotels.com... ...and earn a $50 gift card. because when your business is rewarding yourself... ...our business is you. book direct at choicehotels.com ♪ for miles and miles. running circles ♪ being lost ain't never really been my style. ♪ but i told ya... yo, jer! we gotta get to the show. ♪ i was looking for a sign. get on the bus. ♪ i need something to believe in. ♪ throw my hands up to the ceiling. ♪ oh sky won't you give me a sign. ♪ tell me will the world one day ever be mine? jeep wrangler. freedom to do it all.

. this is "up." the u.s. is sending more troops to saudi arabia, 1,000 of them. they're going there to provide additional deterrent in the face of credible threats, that's according to the pentagon. this comes after the latest incident in the strait of hormuz. iranian revolutionary guard seized a britdi ibritish tanker saying it violated the law. the british foreign minister said it is evessential that freedom of navigation be

maintained. there is so much confusion here on what happened with the tanker or tankers. a lot of confusion on whether surrounding an iranian drone was shot out of the sky by a u.s. warship. get us up to speed on what we know at this point and what we don't know at this point. >> that is right. lots of claims, counterclaims, and finger pointing. with the drone situation initially, president trump had come out and said that the u.s. had shot down an iranian drone that was doing menacing maneuvers around the "uss boxer." the iranians refuted the claim that their drone had been shot down. they said their drone was on a reconnaissance mission, gathered intelligence and safely returned back to base. late last night the iranians

released footage that apparently showed their drone flying around the "uss boxer" and returning to base. the u.s. has not released video of them jamming that drone. they said they technically jammed the drone and brought it down. they have not shown evidence to back up that claim. iran is saying everything the u.s. is saying is groundless and lies. to the tanker incident, this has been brewing for a while now, david. on the fourth of july, the british took an iranian tanker called the greace one. they said it was illegally taking pat trotake ing pet troroleum to syria. the iranians were furious. they said this act of piracy will not go unanswered. lo and behold yesterday a british tanker is taken. now the iranians are saying these are reciprocal actions.

>> hans, you're traveling with the president. you're in bedminster at his estate there. there's a playbook for this you go back to that other drone incident that occurred a few weeks back. there was the become and forth that played out on tv and interviews on twitter of iranians showing footage and the u.s. saying another. the president saying it's not american, it's uk. let's see what happens. characterize for us the u.s. response to these incidents thus far. >> so rhetorically the president is saying this is validation of his maximum pressure campaign working. it was always built in to this whole campaign, this whole strategy, that iran could potentially lash out. the goal of the u.s. position is to force iran back to the negotiating table to do a redo of what the white house says is a disastrous obama administration nuclear agreement. that joint comprehensive plan of action. so we have two separate things going on. we have this oil tanker, it's

being seized, it's british, the u.s. indicated they play a supporting role. and then you have the administration's overall stance and posture towards iran. now, white house officials can't be surprised that iran is lashing out because they're putting so much pressure on them. that's what the xain is campaig designed to do, but they want to force iran back to the negotiationing table, not cause all these problems in the gulf it looks like it's the latter and not the former. the rhetoric from the president also seems slightly inconsistent. at the one moment he's saying iran is in big trouble. the other moment cease sayihe's will all work out great because he's the negotiator. >> thanks to both of you. david, let me turn to you. he's saying this is part of a strategy. >> let's make things more conflictive and add tension to this, that will work out. we'll bring them back to the

table to get the deal that we had originally. none of this makes sense. the president's rhetoric is inconsistent when he talks about iran. his strategic intent is to get them back to a deal that our allies basically say we had a deal. there is not a big room for improvement there. so, it does make sense. in the meantime what got underplayed and lost this week, it was mentioned in the report, we're sending troops to saudi arabia. you know, that this will help us with iran. the saudis who killed a journalist working for an american newspaper, there's still not been accountability for that, we're putting that to the side and sending american soldiers to saudi arabia without any real explanation, without the president talking about it and coming to the public and saying here's my reasoning. this is all run by john bolton. he wants conflict with iran. i don't think it will put us in

a better place. >> emily, i can't count how many hundreds of days since we had a pentagon briefing on any of these matters, help me understand the time horizon issue. you have a president who is, if anything, impatient about the way government works, about the way policy works. it's true of trade and this as well. it strikes me reading comments from the iranian foreign minister, here's a regime with a much longer time horizon. he said explicitly here, we've been around for thousands of years. donald trump will go away. this will continue to play out as it does. how does that square with how the president sees this issue. he's agitated to get out of the deal. he got out of the deal, now expecting immediate action. >> you're asking for rationality where there is none and asking for strategy where there is none. he campaigned heavily against this. he made obama and the u.s. entering into the iranian deal a centerpiece of his election campaign the first time. what he would do as the presidency? make it a priority to back out

of it. this is something john bolton has been itching for for a long time and was advocating for even when we were going into the deal as extreme as possible in language. now that he's in there and has the president's ear, it's not a surprise if there's an opportunity for trump to do something go against the obama administration, he will do it as excitedly and intentlies a poya possible. >> now there's reporting that the foreign minister has met with rand paul, the senator from kentucky. there's a conduit for him to be communicating with a republican member of congress. i cannot imagine that john bolton would be thrilled about the fact that the conduit was open. >> he would not be thrilled if he knew. we don't know that he knew. with this administration, floss proper protocol, they have no respects for the traditions and the actual way government works.

i know nothing about this universal foreign policy, but i do know this president surrounded himself with people whose only goal is to him. there's no substantive policy experts here. there's nobody we can have faith in as the american people that we know what they're doing and wi we can trust them to handle this. they're not even telling us the missteps they're making so we can debate them. the iranian deal was to invite iran on to the stage of global commerce so ultimately things like this don't happen. it shows the trump administration's rejection of all things obama policy has real and dangerous consequences. it's about more than this ego match between he and barack obama that goes back to obama embarrassing him at the white house correspondents dinner, but real serious global implications here. this guy is an unmitigated disaster. it's more than us having racial tensions here. it's the global stage and world

security. >> we'll leave it there and come back in a moment. the dangerous record breaking heat putting nearly 170 million americans at risk as the country buckles under the extreme heat. how to stay safe. ♪ ♪ award winning interface. award winning design. award winning engine. the volvo xc90. the most awarded luxury suv of the century. the volvo xc90. doctor bob, what should i take for back pain? before you take anything,

i recommend applying topical relievers first. salonpas lidocaine patch blocks pain receptors for effective, non-addictive relief. salonpas lidocaine. patch, roll-on or cream. hisamitsu.

so chantix can help you quit slow turkey.rkey. along with support, chantix is proven to help you quit. with chantix you can keep smoking at first and ease into quitting. chantix reduces the urge so when the day arrives, you'll be more ready to kiss cigarettes goodbye. when you try to quit smoking, with or without chantix, you may have nicotine withdrawal symptoms. stop chantix and get help right away if you have changes in behavior or thinking, aggression, hostility, depressed mood, suicidal thoughts or actions, seizures, new or worse heart or blood vessel problems, sleepwalking, or life-threatening allergic and skin reactions. decrease alcohol use. use caution driving or operating machinery. tell your doctor if you've had mental health problems. the most common side effect is nausea. quit smoking slow turkey. talk to your doctor about chantix.

169 million americans will face dangerously hot weather this weekend with temperatures forecast in triple digits. excessive heat warnings are in effect from wichita to boston. some highways literally buckled. get us up to speed on what the forecast is and how long this heat will last, janessa. >> this is escalating fairly quickly. look at the air temperatures across the northeast. new york city at 84. you can see where this defined cold front is. slightly cooler for the upper midwest. i promise that will continue to sweep in here by sunday. now, the big issue, we're going to continue to see warming temperatures. that air temperature will rise throughout the afternoon. it's the heat index. what does that mean? that's the moisture in the

atmosphere. if you're across the northeast now, it feels like a brick wall. currently when you factor in the air temperature and that humidity, currently at 92 degrees. folks, that's going to continue to rise here the next 24 to 36 hours. so as we forecasted here, heat advisories, heat warnings. they'll continue to expand. i do think the tennis vallessee you will be in the mix of this in the next 10, 12 hours. let's talk about temperatures. the darker pinks, the darker reds here, when you factor in those two, the air temperature heat index, we're talking about the feels-like temperature on your skin of 10 109 degrees. please stay safe. we're talking about hydration all day. >> drink that water. we want to turn to kathy park, outside in new york city

feeling those temperatures as they start to rise. give us a sense of what cities like new york are doing to prepare for this extreme heat. >> david, good morning to you. it's 87 degrees already here in the 8:00 hour in midtown manhattan. when you factor in the humidity, it feels like 94. obviously the young and elderly are most at risk when the heat gets to be this hot. because of these extreme conditions the mayor in new york city has canceled some big events including the new york city triathlon and ozzie fest. both events were expected to take place this weekend. thousands were expected to take part. he was citing safety, saying conditions could have become extremely dangerous for folks out and about. he decided to make that decision. obviously because of these extreme conditions, cooling centers are open all over the city. hundreds of them. this is the situation that we're seeing all over the midwest as well as here in the northeast. you just want to use some common

sense. just remind yourself how do you feel if you do have to be outdoors today, if you're feeling dizzy, nauseous, starting to be a little confused. these are symptoms that you want to address quickly. call 911, but also make sure that you check on the elderly as well as the young, obviously they're most at risk during these extreme conditions. >> good advice, kathy park joining us, thank you. i want to take a moment to mark an anniversary 50 years ago, three americans changed the course of history, landing on the moon. back then americans gathered in front of their tvs and radios to hear armstrong's famous words. it was a pivotal moment in the space race expected to launch us into a new age of exploration. the u.s. is celebrating that achievement this week. the washington monument last night illuminated and the two surviving members of the "apollo 11" crew visited the oval office. buzz aldren lamenting what has

not happened since 1969. >> i've been a little disappointed in the last 10, 15 years. we were able to achieve so much early. >> noting the last manned mission to the moon took place in 1972. just ahead, house speaker nancy pelosi trying to unite a fractured democratic caucus. one predecessor says this is her tea party moment. and it really shows. with all that usaa offers why go with anybody else? we know their rates are good, we know that they're always going to take care of us. it was an instant savings and i should have changed a long time ago. it was funny because when we would call another insurance company, hey would say "oh we can't beat usaa" we're the webber family. we're the tenney's we're the hayles, and we're usaa members for life. ♪ get your usaa auto insurance quote today. that's ensure max protein, ♪ with high protein and 1 gram sugar. it's a sit-up, banana! bend at the waist! i'm tryin'! keep it up. you'll get there. whoa-hoa-hoa!

30 grams of protein, and one gram of sugar. ensure max protein. we all use our phones differently. i can manage the time they spend on their phone, who they're texting with, all of that. it's a win for all of us. (vo) the network more people rely on, gives you more. like plans families can mix and match, including the new just kids plan. that's verizon. book two, separate qualifying stays at choicehotels.com... ...and earn a $50 gift card. because when your business is rewarding yourself... ...our business is you. book direct at choicehotels.com

don't miss your gto experience our most advanced safety technology on a full line of vehicles. now, at the lexus golden opportunity sales event. lease the 2019 es 350 for $379 a month, for 36 months, and we'll make your first month's payment. experience amazing. governot just the powerful and well-connected. that's the american promise. but big corporations and special interests are in control.

nothing's happening for real people. our democracy has been purchased. the candidates running for president have great ideas. but we can't get anything done unless we make our democracy serve the people again. i'm tom steyer. i approve this message. i'm running for president because it's time our democracy works for people. this is "up."

nancy pelosi is presiding over a divided house and a divided party since they became house speaker again. she's spent a lot of time trying to unite the democratic caucus. the 2018 midterms ushered in a democratic majority which means many members are more progressive and that led to fissures over legislative priorities and the issue of ideological purity. it's a show john boehner says he's seen before. back in march he predicted democrats would face their own tea party moment and reckoning. it's their turn in the barrel, he said what democrats are going through in 2016 and 2018 with the progressive moment, republicans went through in 2010 and 2012 with the tea party moment. emily, you sat down with the speaker is he lent recently and talked about this in part. maureen dowd talked about how all these people have their public whatever and their twitter world but they didn't have following. there's four people, that's how

many votes they got. she's speaking about these four fee maim congresswomen attacked by the president this week what is the sense of her role now the second time around as speaker? >> it's to pass legislation. it's to pass legislation so that when and if democrats do take over, both houses of congress have a senate they can work with, and a new presidency with a baseline to move. they started by passing sweeping democracy reforms, they passed sweeping gun control, they passed a large minimum wage raise bill. and number two is protecting the house majority. protecting the 100 or so members who won in districts that they didn't think they would win in before. that is her focus. she doesn't take the bait. she stays focused. i asked her specifically about the point, how do you not become the tea party? how do you hold the caucus together? she was quick to say it's not my job to hold everyone together. our values open everyone

together. she is trying to give space and respect for everyone along the ideological spectrum. her job is clear, it's pass legislation and protect vulnerable members. >> i read michelle goldberg's column today, she writes she came to power with the promise to go after trump and therein lies the difficulty. all of these people think that should be priority one for the speaker. >> but at the same time, of the 40 or so democrats who won in 2018, i think 34 or 31 are in districts that trump carried. so the majority of the democratic majority is there in part because people from trump districts won. this gets into the whole impeachment argument. a lot to of them don't want to vote for impeachment and say to their constituents the person you selected for president, i'm dissele

dis-selecting on my own. people in the democratic party and support the squad -- i'm on the progressive side myself" say impeachment is a moral and legal imperative, the evidence is there, but it's still possible that the democrats don't have the votes to pass it. that puts her in a difficult position. she is not just juggling, you know -- i think the tea party analogy is overstated. she's not just juggling a division but a big issue she doesn't want to talk about. for good reason. i think she's in a difficult position. i just wish they would spend more time not on impeachment but on investigations and oversight and hearings showing the corruptions of the trump administration. >> certainly having some big ones this week with bob mueller on capitol hill. don, i want your reaction to the degree to which the house speaker addressed these four congresswomen. yes, she's nodded to them. they've been made mention of at press conferences. there has not ban great show of universit

unity. >> there hasn't been, but they've gotten their just do, the squad. i'm a big fan of the squad. the squad is not on the basket weaving committee, they're on financial services, judiciary. getting time that freshmen members don't get, be they extremely progressive, popular or not. the squad has gotten their due. they're getting press conferences and such when they want to say what they want to say. i think nancy pelosi did her job in showing them due respect. i don't think nancy pelosi's job is to take time dealing with four individual members of congress. her job, 218, to the extent they're hindering 218, their job is to protect the ma jor tichlt majority. >> if they think pelosi and hoyer do a bad job of sharing

power, you don't want to try how kevin mccarthy handles is. >> you have honorary squad members at the table. there was talk about the differences between those four women and maybe the majority of the democratic caucus and the house and congressman frank said the issue is not substance. that's not the issue of difference. it's a strategic and tactical difference. he's saying they sort of ascribe a sense that the majority wants what they want. how much of a disconnect there there in terms of how this all played out? they came in, these four women and others and thought they were speaking for the party as a whole, the caucus as a whole? >> i think it is a difference of tactic. they hold a very big microphone. when they hold a press conference, press shows up. they have more followers on twitter than the entire caucus combined or something crazy like that. >> obviously. >> aoc herself might have more

followers than the rest of the democrats combined. >> and they resonate with young people. i saw someone say she may be like the first kind of reality star member of congress, she lets people in, they connect with that. is that where we're going as a whole? i don't really know. i think this is really a balance between the institution of the house and the power and to your point pelosi elevated them to that level and how much do you balance with the microphone that they have? does that get overcounted? >> that's why pelosi was wrong when she gave that coat to maureen dowd and said, you know, i don't care what they have about twitter, they're just four votes. things have changed with social media and the fact that she have this platform, much bigger than any people in the past with twitter, social media, facebook, instagram, she needs to think about their role in the party a little bit differently.

i also think they need to think about their role in the party as well, so when aoc made those comments, basically accusing nancy pelosi of singling them out because they're women of color, that triggered this whole thing. donald trump gave them an easy way out by going full racist. but nevertheless, she needs to think about her own megaphone and how she can be an insider and outsider within the institution. >> don, lastly to you. >> i don't agree with mr. frank. there are substantive policy differences here. the squad is not where the mainstream democratic party is on campaign finance. that matters. they're not where the mainstream democrats are on drug pricing, pharmaceutical roles and lobbyist roles. i don't think it's simply a matter of tactics. their tactics are they're elevating their policy instance stances, and that does matter. >> there is a space for a left

to push the party, there is space for them to be elevating that conversation on policy. i think they are in an outsized way, but not the way the tea party is. john boehner is very self-interested. >> now it's your turn. i screwed up, now it's your turn to screw up. up ahead, why there's not only one faceoff you can expect to see in ten days time as we get ready for the next 20-candidate democratic debate. no matter what i wore, i worried someone might see

my bladder leak underwear. so, i switched. to always discreet boutique. its shape-hugging threads smooth out the back. so it fits better than depend. and no one notices. always discreet.

what do all these people have in common, limu?oug [ paper rustling ] exactly, nothing. they're completely different people, that's why they need customized car insurance from liberty mutual. they'll only pay for what they need! [ gargling ] [ coins hitting the desk ] yes, and they could save a ton. you've done it again, limu. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪

this is "up" with gadavid gura. the democratic contenders go head to head in ten days. on night two, round two, front-runner joe biden facing off again against senator kamala harris. this week the california senator pulled ahead of the former vice president for the first time in a new california quinnipiac poll. harris edged out biden by two percentage points, 23-21% among democratic voters in the golden state. biden spent this past thursday courting black voters in south los angeles and raised money for

his presidential bid from hollywood executives. don calloway let me start with you. you want to start with california? >> nipsey hustle. stand up. >> let me ask you about the importance of this state. what do you, how much should woe ascribe to the poll? if you look at margin of error, it shows them in a dead heat. her home state, she's playing against biden. >> she did get the bump post doe bait. it is fantastic if you're her. however it's still california. it's a race for delegates and california has a whole lot of dregs. it matters. if you're joe biden you're worried, but you can't be too concerned about losing kamala's home state in which she was the attorney general of the state. department of justice is almost as big as the federals. she's supposed to do very well in california. i think if you're joe biden you're far more concerned with iowa and new hampshire and ultimately south carolina where he still has the lead. >> emily what are you looking for as we approach the next

debate? ten days away, similar opening statements, but a packed stage one night, a packed stage the next night. >> the first night of bernie versus warren i think going to be really interesting. he really hasn't, he really hasn't had to defend himself in the fact that he's lost a large percentage of his voters, supporters both to warren and to mayor pete. and he really hasn't had to defend that at this point. he does like to say that he brought up -- i'm looking to see that conversation. and the two other, besides for warren, the two other breakouts. last time will be the second night, castro and booker. i think it will be interesting to see if they come with any conversation that can break through this juicy biden/harris rematch we're looking for. >> what was the lesson of the last seven debates? who did the best? >> kamala harris. how did she do that? by having a breakout moment

attacking biden. so if you're looking at what worked best last time, you say huh, planning something, implementing it which is when she did, it was very strategic, it was very tactical. and you have all these candidates there. who are below 1%, you know all wanting their breakout moments and you have the top tier, so what i would wonder is, if anyone looks at kamala harris or if kamala harris looks at kamala harris and says, i got to do that. i got to do that again. now elizabeth warren will not be attacking bernie sanders. and i think bernie sanders will not be attacking elizabeth warren. because the, if they turn off their own voters, they go to the person they're attacking. so it's going to be interesting to see how they do that. i expect that to be kind of, kind of a respectful exchange. who is out there circling, who wants to zero in on biden or kamala harris herself. >> harris has established herself as a front-runner in a way she was not before the first two debates. >> using the debate as a

mechanism. >> so she's physically center stage on nit two, the marquee night in my view based on who you have up there. i'm certain her camp is prepared to be the butt of those attacks in a way that joe biden is was clearly the front-runner the last one. she has an opportunity on night two next to joe biden to rise above, to move past the busing issue and look presidential, look extremely dignified. >> i expect a big debate out of her. >> not so much is known about her. she has the opportunity here to really take that interest and nail it down. if she can perform well. and have something to say. >> learn how to prepare for debate like this one. you look at the first night of the last debate and the second night, they took notes of what happened on the first night. what are the candidates going to do differently? david mentioned the dynamics that emerged. >> it's sound bite moments and attacking your opposition. which on the whole a lot of democratic voters would say they

don't want to see them attacking one another. but it's the thing that breaks through. if they have a line that is rehearsed and they can get it in, it's viral and it plays. >> that moment had resonance and longevity, as the campaign moved on from miami, did that surprise you? as you look at differences between the candidates, what could have the longevity from the second debate to the third debate. >> a lot of important issues to talk b. whether it's climate change, medicare for all and other matters that emily is going to talk about in her podcast. >> but to me, what is the thing that the democratic candidate needs the most? the ability to beat donald trump. who poses a tremendous challenge. because he doesn't play by the rules, he wants to bring you into the gutter. how do you take the attacks coming in last set of debates kamala shares showed her target was biden, not trump. she could think strategically

how to come up against an opponent. implement the plan. and people say it wasn't fair, but nevertheless it worked politically. who else can show that type of approach to dealing in a competitive environment? >> we leave it there. thanks to all of you for joining me in new york. tune in tomorrow on "up" i'll be joined by maria hinajosa. up ahead, you can say he's dusting off his old playbook. did he ever put that playbook away? why the president's comments this week should surprise no one. (vo) the insurance institute for highway safety

rates vehicles for safety, and some reach a level of top safety pick. but only a select few of the very safest vehicles are awarded a top safety pick plus. the highest level of safety possible. how many 2019 top safety pick plus-winning vehicles does your brand have? one. two. how about eight? subaru has more 2019 top safety pick plus awards than honda and toyota brands combined. there's safe, and then there's subaru safe.

this is "up" i'm david gura, this morning president trump continues to engage in historical revisionism. he woke up early and said on twitter he did nothing to lead people on at a rally in greenville, north carolina. he said he wasn't particularly happy with the chant that erupted. directed at congresswoman ilhan omar and confoundingly, while he wasn't happy with what they said, he went on to praise them as part of a very big and patriotic crowd. this disingenuous disavowel continues. this week you can't bathe in a chant like that and simply disavow it. what we witnessed this week is not new or novel. it is rhetoric and behavior we have seen time and time again. from the white nationalist rally in charlottesville, virginia,

where he said there were good people on both sides, to this week's tweets, pay attention to the rhetoric and the response or the lack thereof. for many lawmakers, racist is a hard word to say. >> you know -- make america -- his hat, make america white again. they want to make sure that people, certain people are counted. >> the president of the united states of america -- is a reflection, he's preaching -- the seed and sowing the seed of racism. >> were the president's tweets that said go back, racist? >> no. >> i don't think the president is a racist. i don't think he's a zenophobe. >> something we've heard over and over again is some variation of the phrase -- there's not a racist bone in the president's body. i would argue no one knows more about biography and world view than tim o'brien. in his latest column for bloomberg opinion he writes if trump's racism is not in his

bones, it's likely to be found in his heart. he's been awash in it for decades. donald trump's discriminatory behavior dates back decades. in 1973 the trump family's real estate business was censured r for. in 19 0 his ex-wife ivana accused trump of keeping copies of of adolf hitler's speeches by his bed. 2015 he appointed the alt-right agitator steve bannon to a senior role in his campaign and a top spot in the white house. 2016 he called a latino judge in the trump university case biased due to his mexican heritage and the response to charlottesville. his comments about s-hole countries and that's not a comprehensive list, but it paints a picture. up with me this hour, tim

o'brian, msnbc contributor and alexa mccammen, a reporter for axios and myia wiley, an msnbc analyst. >> it was your column that laid this bare. we know more about the president's history. your column and nick cristoph's column. i think there's a tendency on some people's part to see this in a vacuum, but it's part of this long continuum. >> there's a hesitance to call it what it is. there shouldn't be any hesitation. the president is a racist. the president is a bigot. by any standard, we use, to decide whether or not someone is acting is a racist. he ticks off every sing the one of these boxes. that's a column i wrote tried to do. it's in the fact pattern. there's a long history of this from him that pro dated his

arrival in the white house. if you want to put it aside. think about how he's handled the events of the last week. someone who isn't a racist would not handle this the way he's handled this. if my friends mia or alexi said tim what you just said offends me, what you just said is racist, i feel vulnerable, i feel insulted. i would be horrified, i would try make amends as quickly as i possibly could. yet the president targeted four women of color in congress and has shown no remorse for doing so. he's got the nation telling him it's offensive. he's got leaders of foreign countries saying it's unacceptable and he keeps doubling down. why does he double down? because he's a racist. >> what do we as a country do to respond to that? that's the moral challenge that this moment is putting in front of us. and it's a moral challenge. more than a political challenge. we all understand what he's trying to do, politically. and who he's trying to appeal to politically. i think that we're at the we're

not even at the end, part of this arc of what's happened to the country since slavery began. since the civil war was fought. since martin luther king jr. marched. and i think this has been a long, ugly and painful journey and i'm a white guy. for people in this country of color or for women in this country of color, i think this is just doubly horrifying. and i think it's time that we all rise up and be better than ourselves. >> alexa, we have learned that to many republicans, the backbone is a flexible body part i think you could say. >> is it next to the racist bone? >> i want to about the relentlessness of it. when you look at the response the way the president has danced around what he said and come back to it and essentially said the same thing over and over again. we're talking about the playbook and history. how in keeping is that with what we've seen in the past during this presidency and before it? >> in terms of republicans not calling him out. i was at the press conference

with leader kevin mccarthy in which casey hunt asked him were the remarks racist, yes or no and the quickness with with which he could say no is at once surprising and not surprising, right? not surprising because we've seen the ways in which republicans in congress stay in line with president trump no matter what he does. and someone like senator joanie ernst made it a point to say i disagree with his comments, but i want to make it clear that i still support president trump. they go out of their way to embrace hie embrace him, even when disavideoing what he's said. so in that way it's not surprising, it's surprising, it is the year 2019 and we have democrats running for president on a very inclusive message. dropping the names of young black and brown folks who have been wrongfully killed by police officers around the country. this past week was a time in which the police officer involved in killing eric garner was not held accountable for his actions. and all this is happening while

republicans seem to be in a totally different reality than the rest of the country. at least those who genuinely disavow these things going on. not the folks who are at the president's rallies saying "send her back" and things like that. it's an incredibly difficult time to be a person of color, to be a woman of color, to be a journalist. to question whether or not it's okay or objective to call something like this racist. when we know for a fact that it is racist. it lends itself to the question of two things i think. one, who we as a country? i think that will be what this 2020 election reveals. and two, why did the president's words mat centre we can talk and ask republicans all day about whether or not it's racist. at the end of the day i think we should consider maybe not even politically, but personally and morally. why do these words mat centre what does it mean for the future of the country if we allow this to continue without questioning that. >> mia, let's stick there and the "washington post" had a column this week that said we saw a lot of racist-adjacent

phrases being used this week. people couldn't call the comments racist. but they could use any number of phrases hooked together with a hyphen. talk about the politics of that later. but what is the difficulty of men and women being able to call things as they see them, say about where we are culturally as a country right now. >> it's where we've been for a long time. i think we have to acknowledge trump is racist and it's not new. but neither is it new for the country. that we fundamentally have a misunderstanding of racism in america. remember when barack obama won the presidency, and everyone said, okay, we're done here, we've done it. we're good. many of us are say week did something symbolically extremely important. but that's not the metric of whether or not we are living together in a pluralistic society, in a fair and decent and nonracist way. trump is symptomatic of a larger

and deeper problem. i think to your point in your question, david, part of what that is is we don't even have an agreement in this country about what racism is. racial resentment is a better measure of our attitude than say, very explicit verbal language. meaning if you look at it, many american who is are white will say things like -- black people are getting too many unfair advantages, black people should work harder. mexicans shouldn't be coming to this country just to take our benefits, right? and for many who say that, they themselves do not believe themselves to be racist, right? their self-identity is not racist. the way that translates into a political conversation is -- people say -- well i can't call people racist who think they're not. it polarizes the discussion.

and if you're a republican, you have the added challenge of trying to keep your party in power at the same time you know your party is wrong. how politically do you navigate that? we would hope it would be in the way that a justin amash has navigated that. which is to stay i'll stick true to small "d" democratic principles and constitutional principles of how we run and operate and live in a pluralistic society. >> tim, want to ask you about something you said a moment ago. help us understand the way that the president processes these claims against him. he clearly hates being called a racist to some degree. but he has this class that has emerged around him. we saw it a few weeks back when his son-in-law jared kushner sat down with jonathan swann. i didn't see him exhibit racist behavior to paraphrase jared kushner. you've had him now, he's reaching out to kanye west about

this. but the way that he responds to this and the way that he has is allowed to respond to this. because of the actions of republicans saying as mia is saying he can't be this if he says he's not this. >> the republicans actually gave him a way out starting almost immediately after he tweeted. >> after the vacuum. >> when he sat there and everyone was horrified and he didn't say anything and republicans shifted it and said this isn't about race. it's about nationalism. it's about pride in your country. they're actually not even making it a distinct nationalism and patriotism, no distinction between them. >> the event that he threw on july 4 and the squishiness surrounding those two terms. >> the strength of this country is that we're diverse, we can dissent and live together as a tolerant community. that's patriotic. nationalism tries to put those things aside and it's a buzzword to me, it's a more palatable

form of racism. a way to use the word without using the word so you can get your point across. i don't, i think you know what's amazing to me about trump in this, there are things that authentically knock him off his seat that he gets mad about. when he's perceived as a loser. when chuck schumer or nancy pelosi are perceived as having outsmarted him on budget negotiations. he actually didn't get get emotionally and personally upset about this. it didn't show anywhere. he sort of rolling with it. almost like a drunken sailor. i didn't really know what happened. and he just kept rolling through these speeches. and now he's propagandaizing about it saying i didn't incent the crowd. he's tolerating it at a national level. he's the president of the united states. we talked what are we going to do about this.

famously lyndon johnson was told by his own party. if the voting rights act and civil rights act went through, he turned to his aides and said, what's a presidency for. political courage is about a willingness to lose your office to dot right thing and to not get re-elected or as abraham did, lose your life to do the right thing. the republican party is a party of cowards. >> can i say something quickly about patriotism and all this. we don't have to think that far back to when president trump, then candidate trump was rupping for president on a laundry list of things wrong with the country. also make america great again fundamentally suggests there are problems within the country. he compared laguardia airport to a third world country. talked about how bad our infrastructure was, it was going to be his first thing. said the country was filled with rapists and criminal who is are immigrants. >> who were mexicans. >> suggested that black americans' lives are so bad they had nothing to lose by voting for him.

>> we get shot on every corner of our neighborhoods, as if that's the black experience in america. is that we're just violent. but one last thing -- what donald trump did for the republican party, was he broke the southern strategy. so long history, ronald reagan announced his presidency in philadelphia, mississippi where goodman and the civil rights activist registering people to vote were murdered by the klan. he did it and used the language of state's rights, that was a dog whistle. that said -- i'm, you, if you're racist, i'm your guy. everyone who was black in america knew exactly what he was saying. that strategy perfected by nixon, is, was not new to the republican party, and where republicans during the campaign in 2016 were starting to distance themselves from them, it, from trump, it was because they thought -- this is not the playbook. it doesn't work to be explicit in your racism. you have to be subtle.

you have to be signaled. and if you don't do that, we'll lose. >> i want to ask you about the new harmonics of this dog whistle and get your reaction to how those who are in that auditorium would react to what he had to say, disavowing them as he tried to do in the oval office or sort of moving the allegation of racism on to them. we can talk about the fealty, inaction of republican leadership, those elected to office. but what's the message being sent to those gathered in that arena in greenville, north carolina. >> that it's okay to, do okay to do as group. and if anyone condemns you, we'll come to your defense. i would refer back to what maya just said, i don't think the republican party did willie horton ads. the republican party used euphemism as an electoral strategy. think what trump has done, and it's not only on race, it's, i think it's about around

feminism. nationalism. a whole host of issues that we used to have at least this, this civility about. he's ripped the band-aid off the idea of what the country is about. one thing i will say is if there's an upside to that. it's forcing us to confront the fact that racism persists in this country long before trump became president and it's still something we have to fix. still ahead, the impeachment debate, one of the many issues that democrats are at odds over. we'll talk to democratic congressman and 2020 presidential hopeful, seth moulten about the leadership divide and how to end that schism.

if you have postmenopausal osteoporosis and a high risk for fracture now might not be the best time to ask yourself are my bones strong? life is full of make or break moments. that's why it's so important to help reduce your risk of fracture with prolia®. only prolia® is proven to help strengthen and protect bones from fracture with 1 shot every 6 months. do not take prolia® if you have low blood calcium, are pregnant, are allergic to it or take xgeva®

serious allergic reactions, like low blood pressure trouble breathing; throat tightness; face, lip, or tongue swelling rash; itching; or hives have happened. tell your doctor about dental problems as severe jaw bone problems may happen or new or unusual pain in your hip groin, or thigh, as unusual thigh bone fractures have occurred. speak to your doctor before stopping prolia® as spine and other bone fractures have occurred. prolia® can cause serious side effects, like low blood calcium; serious infections which could need hospitalization; skin problems; and severe bone joint, or muscle pain. are you ready? ask your doctor how prolia® can help strengthen your bones.

this week for the first time the house of representatives had a vote on impeachment. while it was defeated. the 95 democrats who voted not to table the resolution, indicates there's growing support within the party for impeachment proceedings. house speaker nancy pelosi remains reluctant to do so. she may be running out of options. there were challenges to nancy pelosi's return to the speakership and my next guest mounted one of them. he said leadership is dividing the democratic caucus over this issue and others. joining us is the gentleman who represents the north shore. congressman seth moulten. i want to start with the issues we were talking about a few moments ago. talking about how the genesis of the most recent iteration of this were tweets sent out a week

ago. had you become speaker of the house. how would you have reacted to what the president said in that rally in north carolina a little bit later in the week? >> i would have been unequivocal in making it clear that he's a racist and not being afraid to use those terms. i also would have already started impeachment proceedings. i think this is a moral moment for the country. really a test for us in history. and we've got to do the right thing and uphold the constitution of the united states. which says when a president breaks the law, you hold impeachment proceedings. that's why i voted for this not just this past week, but back in december of 2017. i said look i get that the politics might be tough, the polls might be against us, but it's simply the right thing to do. in the past those advocating for impeachment cited all the president had done before that. in terms of his campaign.

the rest rick we saw this week how did that change the conversation or the democratic messaging on impeachment as you see it? >> i think it focuses more on the morality of the situation. that this is truly a moral moment in history. if you think back during the 186 0s and the civil war. i think future generations will look back and say what did the democratic party do when the president of the united states not only violated the law, but was clearly a racist? was clearly inciting racial violence? and the answer is right now we're not doing enough. we're clearly not doing enough. and so we have a moral obligation at this time in history to do the right thing. to all the people who say the polls aren't with you or whatever -- leaders don't follow polls, polls follow leaders. this is the time to take action to hold this president

accountable. think at the end of the day, not only is it the right thing to, do i think we'll be rewarded in the eyes of history. because people know in, people know in their hearts that it's the right thing to do when the president breaks the law. >> congressman when were you mounting your case to become the next speaker, you couched it in generational terms. how much of that do you assign to being older or younger in the congress? do you think there's a generational issue at play in terms of the democratic response to what happened this week? >> well to be clear, i was not running to be speaker myself. i was saying after working so hard to help win the house of representatives. to bring in this new generation of leadership, into our ranks, i want to make sure the new generation has a voice, gets a chance to lead. i haven't just been talking about a new generation of leadership in washington, i've been fighting for it since the day i took on an 18-year incumbent in my very first race. i think it's time for the

generation to step up. because we face a new generation of challenges. it's not just issue likes this, although this is one of them. it's also the fact that the economy is changing factor than it's ever changed before. we face national security issues that are totally different because russia and china are attacking us through the internet. let's not forget that one of the things that robert mueller brought to the forefront of his investigation, is that vladimir putin and russia wanted trump elected president. that's a national security issue. and we're failing to address that if we don't hold impeachment hearings as well. we need to have these hearings so we can have transparent before congress and the american people, a debate about what went wrong. actually get the power of the subpoenas that trump just ignoring with his cronies like kellyanne conway. give teeth to those investigations by starting this, these impeachment proceedings and making it clear to the american people what donald trump is really all about. and you know what, even if he doesn't get convicted by the senate, i get the fact that that

might happen. having that debate will change people's minds. and if we go into the next election, right, right when we have that debate before the american people, and it's very clear that the president is breaking the law. even if he doesn't get convicted by the senate, people will see that the democratic party has the conviction to do the right thing. and that will make a big difference in 2020. >> maya wiley, how did the conversation change this week? there was the resolution against what the president tweeted and the impeachment resolution on the heels of that. how do you see that as changing or shaping the conversation going forward when it comes to this issue? >> i don't think that changed the shape of the conversation in the sense that i think to congress moulton's point. the democratic base has been very clear about the morality and the principles and the constitutional principles of holding this president accountable. and so, another vote on a different issue and representative green was very clear, this has nothing to do

with those other issues. i don't think it change it is fundamentally where people were on the issue. they were where they were. the question becomes putting aside, i agree with constitutional issues and the morality issues is to what extent is nancy pelosi's concern that she doesn't actually have the votes within the democratic caucus. remember, 31 democrats won. she was part of the leadership that helped the democrats take back the house. if you're thinking about those 31 votes right, and you have the number of votes you have to get to, to get an articles of impeachment out of the house. notwithstanding the senate, do they have the votes? is that her concern? what conversations are happening? this conversation around al green's resolution does not change that calculus. >> well because i think that of the 85 house democrats who had previously publicly endorsed the idea of beginning impeachment

proceedings, 14 of them sided with republicans in voting to table this issue. if congressman moulton is still with us, i would love to ask him a question, congressman, about whether and how voters are talking to you and asking you about impeachment when you're on the campaign trail. when i've been to different states it doesn't come up from voters, it comes up from us reporters from d.c. and maybe if the candidates talk about it. but are voters talking to you about it? and how are they doing that? >> i do hear about it. sometimes it is, me who bring it is up. i say this is a moral test for our party. and for our country. when i make the point that i get the fact that the votes might not be all there right now. that polls might be against us. simply the right thing to do. that really resonates with people. there's no one in our caucus, i agree with your points, but there's no one in our caucus that's shifting from being supportive of it to going against it. there were some technical reasons that some of them voted

against this particular tabling resolution, they talked about that with me on the floor. every week a few more democrats moved towards this, towards my position. that i've had for longer than anyone else in this presidential race in fact which is that we need to have this transparent, open debate in congress. so no one is shifting in the other direction. and it points to the fact that when impeachment proceedings started against nixon, only 30% of the country thought that he should be impeached. once we had this debate in congress, that public opinion shifted dramatically. so much so that he resigned to avoid being impeached. well the percentages right now are much higher than 30%, 45% of americans already believe that donald trump should be impeached and at some point they're going to be holding democrats accountable for not having the courage to do that. not having the courage to simply do the right thing in the face of political opposition. >> congressman thank you very much. appreciate the time and i apologize for ascribing some motivations to you earlier.

seth moulton joining us this morning as tensions ratchet up between the u.s. and iran. iran warns of serious consequences what could be coming next? and temperatures are heating up. who is most at risk as the nation braces for a blilterring heat wave. ♪ limu emu & doug look limu. a civilian buying a new car. let's go. limu's right. liberty mutual can save you money by customizing your car insurance, so you only pay for what you need. oh... yeah, i've been a customer for years. huh... only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪

well this is "up" i'm david gura, we are continuing to monitor tensions in the persian gulf. iranian guards seizing a british-flagged tanker, saying it violated international regulation. only the latest in a series of escalations that began after the u.s. pulled out of the 2016 nuclear deal and imposed economic sanctions on iran. despite the ramped-up rhetoric. both countries have said they're not looking for war, but a diplomatic resolution. iran's foreign minister suggested his country would be open to talks if the u.s. were to lift economic sanctions. the foreign minister is talking to senator rand paul. a republican who has the president's ear and the situation has escalated after president trump claimed the "uss boxer" shot down an iranian drone. >> the "boxer" took defensive action against an iranian drone. which had closed into a very, very near distance. the drone was immediately

destroyed. >> iranian government denied the report releasing a video of the drone that was set to have been shot down. iran's foreign minister responded to the report saying the drone was not iranian. >> to the best of our information we didn't lose any drones yesterday. so it doesn't look like that they shot one of our drones. maybe they shot one of their drones, the reports that they shod schott probably somebody else's drones. but provocative? even if it were our drone. we are in our own neighborhood. the u.s. naval vessel is about 6,000 miles away from its shores. i would ask you who is being provocative. >> tensions at an all-time high in the region. the u.s. defense department will be deploying troops to saudi arabia in hopes of a deterrent. former u.s. ambassador to nato,

ambassador nick burns. i want to read a quotation from robin wright. writing for the new yorker. about conversations about what has or hasn't happened in the neighborhood. she writes in dealing with the islamic republic, the challenge is finding the key to break the eye for an eye cycle. iranians have a long history and long memories. what is your read of what's happening here? and what's your best counsel of how to break that cycle? david, i think this is actually a serious crisis in the gulf and i would separate this issue, what's happening in the gulf with the iran nuclear deal. i think they're very separate issues. in the gulf it's a vital international waterway. a lot of the world's oil and gas comings out of the strait of hormuz to the big asian and european economies. we can't allow iran acting in this case like a pirate nation, to shut the gulf down. so it looks like the administration is sending some forces to saudi arabia, that

seems appropriate. it also looks like the administration is thinking about organizing international convoys to escort these commercial vessels through the gulf. that's absolutely necessary. because if iran intimidates world oil and gas companies, shipping companies from going through the gulf it will impact the global economy. and also the rule of law. i think the trump administration is right to take a, a tough response here. this is not war-like on our part. in fact we're reacting to clearly illegal international behavior by the iranian government there are other issues here. should we be talking to the iranians? yes, we should, we should have a diplomatic channel. should president trump have left the nuclear deal? i think that's a mistake. first we can't allow iran to intimidate the rest of the world. >> i want to ask you about this moment for diplomacy. foreign minister zarif sat down with steve inches keep. and asked about engagement and

the prospects for engagement. how all of this is playing in iran. this is what he said. he said engagement has lost credibility at home. people don't look at engagement with the international community. the united states for one reason -- for not keeping its word. the europeans for another reason -- for not being able to stand on their word. so yeah, engagement is losing credibility and by extension i am losing credibility. he said a moment ago that diplomacy needs to continue, we should be trying to talk with the iranians. what's your sense of the window for doing that in light of all that's happening? i don't agree with foreign minister zarif. he'll have seen the extraordinary interview with the former president of iran, hard-liner ahmadinejad where he is calling for diplomacy. it doesn't mean you like the other government. it means you're using a tool here, open discussions to try to resolve conflicts. it's in the interest of the trump administration to have some type of diplomatic channel with iran. now president trump shut that

off, after president obama had created that channel. i think that was a mistake by president trump. if zarif, the foreign minister is in the united states now talking to american senators, that's positive. more important to talk to the secretary of state or someone representing the secretary of state, mike pompeo. you want to deliver a very tough and clear message to the iranians. about their drone activity, against our ships, against threats to take, to attack american ships. and what they've done in the last 48 hours, that's impound a commercial vessel. that's the best way to handle this. i don't think the iranians are looking for war. we are certainly not looking for war. but you also have to have a tough-minded approach to back them down a little bit and not be intimidated by them. >> joining us from the aspen security forum, ambassador nick burns, former u.s. ambassador to nato. heat wave, we'll tell you how dangerous the temperatures are expected to get after the

break.

severe heat is putting over half the u.s. population at risk this weekend. the national weather service put excessive heat warnings and advisories into effect along the gulf coast and from kansas to maine. it affects over 169 million people. the heat is radiating into the 2020 race. "the new york times" reporting it's going to be so hot that

mayor bill de blasio canceled his presidential campaign events to stay in the city. also canceled the new york city triathlon. >> help us understand how big and how wide it's going to affect americans. >> it's impacting two-thirds of the nation here and it's moving in fairly quickly. right now, washington, d.c., just about 10:00, 98 degrees. so this is going to continue to rise throughout the day. so your safety is a huge concern and unfortunately we do have one confirmed death. nfl superstar mitch petrus died of heat stroke last night. water hydration, our thoughts and prayers go out to his family. you know what, this comes just after noaa releasing the hottest june on record. on average, temperatures were about 2 to 3 degrees above norm at. compared to the last 20 years.

we're going to continue to watch temperatures rise during the day and we're thinking about your safety. if your car is in the heat, starting at 95 degrees here, just after an hour, the feels-like temperature inside that car -- 142 degrees. >>dy not mention what people are going to be feeling like if they're in new york city riding the subway. >> serious indeed. janessa webb. thank you. gop lawmakers wrestle with whether to embrace or disavow what the president says no matter what i wore, i worried someone might see

my bladder leak underwear. so, i switched. to always discreet boutique. its shape-hugging threads smooth out the back. so it fits better than depend. and no one notices. always discreet. {tires screeching} {truck honking} [alarm beeping] (avo) life doesn't give you many second chances. but a subaru can.

(dad) you guys ok? you alright? wow. (avo) eyesight with pre-collision braking. standard on the subaru ascent. the three-row subaru ascent. love. it's what makes a subaru a subaru. . well president trump's racist remarks and the firestorm of controversy they generated have forced a political calculation on many republicans. here's how gop lawmakers have reacted to president trump's tweets. according to a running tally from the "washington post." 19 condemned trump's remarks, 59 have criticized democrats and president trump. 110 have not commented or given vague statements, 62 supported president trump's remarks.

take a listen as to why. >> do i think the president is a racist? no, and i'll tell you why. if you're a somali refugee and you're wearing a magga hat and a big trump fan you would probably be having dinner at the white house. >> he talked about the love of this country and said if you don't love this country, can you leave. that's a fundamental difference, that's what the president is talking about. this is an issue about ideology. >> well the president is not a racist. the president is not a racist. and i think the tone of all of this, is not good for the country. >> the president's remarks are inappropriate. many legitimate criticisms can you make of those, but you shouldn't use terminology like that. >> i think what you heard was a frustration that was not based on any religious preference, on any skin color or anything else, it's a frustration that we have congress that needs to act and they haven't acted. >> curious as to whether or not they'll pay a political price for their reaction or lack thereof. we want to go to steve kornacki

now. we'll talking about the social and cultural history and implications of all this. help us understand the politics historically. >> we're talking about politicians here, politicians respond to political politicia respond to political incentives. what incentive are republicans responding to more, the fear of a general election or the fear of a republican primary? and let me give you some recent history that puts this in perspecti perspective. this is what before last year's midterm elections. before november of 2018, these are 25 republicans, 25 republicans in the house just before last year's midterm election who represented districts that had voted against trump. districts that had voted for hillary clinton. there were more than two dozen. 25 republicans like that. those are the kinds of republicans who would feel the most pressure to distance themselves from a president in a situation like this. after the 2018 midterm, after it

hit you had three left. three republicans now in current congress, three chin members of the house represent districts that voted against trump so that pipes outs a lot of that general election incentive talking about there. so you put this resolution on the floor democrats did condemning the president. four republicans voted for that resolution. one of those was from texas. another was ryan fitzpatrick. you got john in new york, he actually voted against the resolution. he criticized the president's remarks. but all told if you look at this, here's the four, hurt, pits pattic upton in michigan. and then you've got susan brooks from indiana. susan brooks announced a couple weeks ago she's retiring. no more political pressure for her.

so if you wipe out all the folks who have to worry about the general election consequences they start borrowing more about the primary consequences and it makes them less likely to break with the president. >> i want to becon you over to the table. i want to get a sense from you about leadership's messaging on all of this. we've spoken about the pause, the vacuum that happened after the president made these remarks. help us understand the role that leadership is playing in that messaging. >> i think mitch mcconnell's answer is a little more interesting especially when he got the question about his own wife. and that's interesting to me because mitch mcconnell is obviously the senate majority leader and there are number of vulnerable i would say senate republicans coming up for re-election who are now facing off democratic candidates who

have a strong foreign policy background in places like kentucky, colorado, texas and i think it's really difficult for republicans to argue that they've put their country over party in moments like this while at the same time this type of democratic candidate can very easily make that argument that they've always put country over party and introduce themselves to voters in that way. i think it's interesting to see how mitch mcconnell wiggles his way around the rhetoric but also the future of the senate when there's a candidates popping up on the other side looking like this. >> and the four who lost their seats they're going to make jobs, maybe they'll pontificate on how politics works in the country today. how real is that? put the hypothetical out there. if more people were to speak up against what the president says or does, the forcefulness with which he could sfeek out against them would be diminished.

right? >> i think you've got the psychology of republican elected officials. you have to think back three or four years. donald trump didn't have single endorsement from a republican member of congress when he won his first primary in 2016. there is no modern precedent in either party for somebody going completely around the establishment like that. the elected establishment and having success. and i think it created this fear of him and it's a fear that's been reinforce. mark sanford was back in the news. former governor from south carolina. maybe he's going to take a run at him in the primaries but remember the story that republican members of congress take from mark sanford is last year mark sanford used to be mr. conservative running in a republican primary being challenged and trump tweets out and an endorsement rips him and he loses the primary. and not all but most of them have that in their head somewhere. this is the potential

consequence about speaking out against him. >> well, part of it is we have to connect to one another and connect to our actual experiences. so sfar example, you know, it's -- obviously for black people the go home has been a long standing refrain for any critique. any time black people stand up and say we want more justice it's like, well, go back to africa. we would go through the history of that but it's true for jews like they were saying you can't come here, it's not part of us. it's true for irish. there was a party that formed in this country politically around sending european immigrants back to europe and telling them to go home. so -- and a lot of that was about how we racialized other people so i'm just saying this has been a long standing

political issue and we have to get past it. >> got to leave it there just because of the time. thanks to all of you. coming up at the top of the hour joy reid is going to discuss how donald trump just changed the entire 2020 election. that's coming up. 0 election that's coming up hmm. exactly.

liberty mutual customizes your car insurance, so you only pay for what you need. nice. but, uh... what's up with your... partner? not again. limu that's your reflection. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty, liberty, liberty, liberty ♪

that does it for me today, thank you very much for watching. am joy with joy reid starts right now. >> obviously and importantly

omar has a history of launching vicious anti-semitic screams. >> good morning and welcome to "am joy." when republicans saw that display in north carolina this week and the backlash their original response was to scramble for an excuse. i mean, that display clearly looks bad, like reminds one of bad, bad. and they hit the air waves to do some serious spinning pretending that what you saw in that tape was not donald trump