that's it for this hour of msnbc live. "andrea mitchell reports" starts right now. >> and now on "andrea mitchell reports," what recession? the president downplays warning signs of a potential economic downturn. >> i don't think we're having a recession. we're doing extremely well. our consumers are rich. i've given a tremendous tax cut and they're loaded up with money. seeing green. the real estate mogul in chief has his eyes on greenland even though it's not for sale. >> it feels as if he's

perpetualizing. >> he can buy anything, i guess. or this is what he thinks he can, but you can't. and making amends after new attacks from president trump, elizabeth warren apologizes to native americans for her past dna claims. >> i am sorry for harm i have caused. i have listened and i have learned. good afternoon. breaking news. i'm andrea mitchell in washington. the breaking news is from new york city where wnbc tv, our station in new york, is reporting we are expecting a decision momentarily on whether the nypd will fire officer daniel pantaleo, the officer at the center of the eric garner case, who died five years ago. the police commissioner has scheduled a press conference later this hour. of course, we will bring you the details as soon as they become available. first here in washington, president trump clinging to the economy to boost his re-election

chances. nbc news/wall street journal poll shows the president's handling of the economy as a big bright spot in a sea of negative numbers. one of the most glaring is on trade, where reaction against the president's tariffs, his trade war with china has support for free trade hitting an all-time high in the history of our poll. 64% now believing that free trade is good for america. this, as mr. trump continues to wage that trade war with china. joining me now, nbc white house correspondent jeff bennett, political analyst roberta costa, national political reporter at the washington post and moderator of washington week. editor at large for the financial times. welcome all. first to you, jeff bgeoff bennee president talking after his ten-daybreak, messaging that everything is fine with the economy. we saw larry k.

dlow udlow on "meet the press." what are you hearing about those numbers? >> never mind the stock market swings and growing trade numbers, the u.s. economy will be strong through 2020. that's what you're hearing from the president and his top advisers publicly and that's what the president is telling his advisers privately, that he's not at all concerned politically about the signs of a global slowdown popping up nearly everywhere. that said, andrea, the president is preemptively attacking those of us in the media for even talking about the potential of a recession and he's still on the attack, attacking the fed chairman, jerome powell. here is the tweet in the last hour, our economy is very strong, despite the horrendous lack of vision by jay powell and the feds. the economics of it can be debated. what can't be debated is that the status of the economy is so often a trend of wh

electorically. and that's one of the reason that jerome powell, kellyanne conway, peter navarro, are not even willing to entertain a recession down the road here. >> and larry kudlow playing cheerleader in chief on "meet the press" and the other shows. take a look. >> i sure don't see a recession. we had some blockbuster retail sales consumer numbers toward the back end of last week, really blockbuster numbers. you know, what we've got here, consumers are working at higher wages. >> right. >> they are spending at a rapid pace. they are actually saving also while they're spending. it's an ideal situation. the second half, the economy will be very good in 2019. >> 39% of those polled approve

of the president's handling of the economy. 33% approve of him overall. the economic numbers are a bright spot for him. jillian tete, what about the real economy? the president seems to react to the market the way he reacts to polls and we had that 800-point drop last week, the markets recovering today. last i checked, partly is it because germany said that they're going to goose their economy that's lacking? what are you seeing globally? >> here is the key issue. when larry kudlow came out and said that consumers are doing great, he was correct, but you could have said exactly the same thing back in late 2007, early 2008, just before the financial crisis. and what larry kudlow did not say is if you look at surveys of american businesses right now, they are looking very concerned. and for two reasons. first, the global economy is absolutely slowing down. just this morning, they came out and indicated that germany is

hovering on the edge of recession. other parts of europe and asia are looking worse, too. but secondly, people are very concerned, indeed, in business about the impact of the trade war. and it's the uncertainty that's causing great concern. much of the consumer data is backward looking. businesses are providing the forward-looking data. that's what's starting to flash red and that's the reason that the stock markets have been on this wild, crazy roller coaster ride in recent days as ever august, a very nasty bellwether ahead for the markets. >> and robert costa, when you look at this politically, the president is really wrapping himself in the economy. so, he has to be worried about this. >> it also changes the 2020 outlook for both president trump and democrats running for the white house. a possible economic downturn on the horizon means democrats are also grappling with president

trump's economic message, not just going after the tax cut but americans worried about the economy, their own solutions. so you see senators like warren and sanders, they're getting more traction, but especially senator warren, with their offer of more government intervention, with higher taxes on the rich and the idea that the government could help provide stability for people in this kind of unknown economic climate. >> gillian what about the president beating up on jay powell, his appointee to the fed? it's a convenient scapegoat. is that going to gain traction? >> basically, the president is clearly looking for scapegoats to blame if things do go off the rails early in the year and next year. unfortunately, jay powell is absolutely in the crosshairs. most economists, most business leaders would say that is grotesquely unfair because although the fed maybe did loosen or cut one too far, it

certainly can't be blamed for the wider economic slowdown. but the really interesting question right now is with the fed under pressure politically to act, there's a growing sense amongst many economists that it can't afford to do so. it can't cut rates as the president is demanding, because it would look like it's losing its credibility and independence. so you have this very interesting tug of war happening right now. and the reality is that we're in extraordinary times because we have an enormous part of the global bond market now with negative yields. people are saying that even treasuries could go negative soon. and that, if it occurs, will not just be very peculiar for finance, it will also get people talking again about the recession, which is the last thing the president actually wants. >> and then let's talk about greenland. geoff bennett, the president confirming on his trip back from yesterday that he really is interested in it. he thinks denmark, which owns

greenland is losing $7 million a year. and he's a real estate guy and this is a real estate deal the way he looks at it. >> yeah. >> the danish prime minister was in greenland over the weekend saying, not so fast. not for sale and the president is going to denmark on a previously scheduled trip at the end of the month. this all adds up to an awkward visit. >> that's right, andrea. it's a bizarre proposition on its face. because the president was talking about it, took questions about it, it's up to talk about it, and try to parse what's real to what's just amusing at this point, yes. he goes to copenhagen, warsaw, and copenhagen. one wonders the kind of conversations he intends to have about purchasing greenland. it has been attempted and thought about decades ago in administration's past. greenland, as you all know, is rich with mineral resources and that sort of thing. to fast forward to the current day, i don't think anyone in this white house and those of us

who cover it, think this is actually ever going to happen. andrea? >> robert costa, we do have a u.s. air base there. but the fact of buying greenland, harry truman thought about it in 1946 and also in 1867, there was talk about it. but in this day and age, it would be crazy. >> my spourss -- >> well, can i talk? >> yes. >> robert first and then let gillian in, too. >> my sources on capitol hill think this is a distraction that the president, whether or not he pursues this or not would generate public interest and he likes the idea of purchasing property coming out of the real estate business. in terms of the geopolitical strategy, this greenland issue is not something that's part of the whole u.s. approach to the world. it's more of an issue for president trump to talk about, like he would talk about some

sort of cultural flashpoint this week. >> and gillian? >> well with, all due respect, i think the idea has been tossed around quite a bit in recent months. people i've been speaking to in washington have been talking about this. it's something which wasn't on the table at all a year ago. in fact, the americans were offered a chance to invest in air bases and things, and ports, and they actually turned some of that down. what i expect to see going forward is not so much a debate about whether the government should buy greenland as a whole but whether you're going to start to see american equity and private financial companies investing in hard assets. quite apart from the mineral issue and geopolitical issue to do with the arctic circle and military aspect there's also a big debate about climate change and greenland is one of those places that you want to be in if you believe any of the climate change projections in the coming years are going to be true. people inside the u.s. military right now absolutely can see

that equation. >> but, of course, you're dealing with a president who does not believe in the climate change factors, but that's another whole issue. >> so he says, but that's changing. that's changing, because the military does believe in climate change and that's having an impact inside the white house. >> we'll have to leave it there for today. gillian tett, thanks so much, robert costa and geoff bennett, thanks to all of you. preventing the next attack, string of arrests around the country of suspects who threatened to carry out mass shootings. stay with us. you're watching "andrea mitchell reports" only on msnbc. reports" only on msnbc he corner? he corner? or could it turn out differently? i wanted to help protect myself. my doctor recommended eliquis. eliquis is proven to treat and help prevent another dvt or pe blood clot... almost 98 percent of patients on eliquis didn't experience another. ...and eliquis has significantly less major bleeding than the standard treatment. eliquis is fda approved and has both.

don't stop eliquis unless your doctor tells you to. eliquis can cause serious and in rare cases fatal bleeding. don't take eliquis if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding. if you had a spinal injection while on eliquis call your doctor right away if you have tingling, numbness, or muscle weakness. while taking eliquis, you may bruise more easily... and it may take longer than usual for bleeding to stop. seek immediate medical care for sudden signs of bleeding, like unusual bruising. eliquis may increase your bleeding risk if you take certain medicines. tell your doctor about all planned medical or dental procedures. what's around the corner could be surprising. ask your doctor about eliquis. when didwhen i needed ton? jumpstart sales. build attendance for an event. help people find their way. fastsigns designed new directional signage. ...and got them back on track. get started at fastsigns.com.

...and it's now on sale fors and just $59.ories. it can lead you on an unexpected journey... ...to discover your heritage. get your dna kit (now) for just $59 at ancestry.com. that could allow hackers devices into your home.ys and like all doors, they're safer when locked. that's why you need xfinity xfi. with the xfi gateway, devices connected to your homes wifi are protected. which helps keep people outside from accessing your passwords, credit cards and cameras. and people inside from accidentally visiting sites that aren't secure. and if someone trys we'll let you know. xfi advanced security. if it's connected, it's protected.

call, click, or visit a store today.

55% of americans now say they are very worried about another deadly attack by white nationalists. this, after police foiled two mass shootings over the weekend, one in ohio and the other in florida. b blayne alexander has more. >> this is what police in new middletown, ohio, found when they raided the home of a 20-year-old suspect, ar-15s, a rifle with a bayonet, bulletproof vest and plenty of ammo. the self-proclaimed white nationalist is seen firing

shots. >> he was implying he would be identified as the shooter of the youish center. that kicked off a very intense investigation. >> the suspect attended the 2017 u unite the right in charlottesville, virginia, and even did this interview. >> i want a white america. >> police there found their suspect in a winn-dixie parking lot. >> any weapons we need to know about? >> the 25-year-old is charged with making threats of a mass shooting after police obtain ed i wanna open fire on a large crowd of people and that he hoped to break a world record. >> reportedly two other mass sho shooting threats in ohio and in connecticut. joining me now to discuss this disturbing news, former congressman steve israel and michael steele, former chair of the republican party and msnbc

political analyst. steve, first to you. you know congress so well. is this fear, 55% now really worried about white nationalist mass shootings. is this fear going to do anything to impell congress to act beyond perhaps red flag laws? >> i hope it does. i wish members of congress would pay attention to the very alarming statistics. andrea, the fbi director testified to congress a few weeks ago and said in the third quarter of this fiscal year, the fbi made 100 international terrorist-related arrests and an equivalent number of domestic terrorism arrests, the vast majority related to white supremacy. the southern poverty law center has told congress there's been a 30% increase in hate groups since the inauguration of donald trump and the adl, an die defamation league has told congress there's been a significant increase in anti-semitic crimes, 2,000

anti-semitic assaults in 2018, the third highest on record. now, it would be unfair to say that donald trump creates this hate, but he certainly gives it license. and he licenses it when he says things like there are fine people on both sides of a neo nazi protest. >> and, michael steele, are there any concerns in the republican party that this president and others are helping to at least validate these horrible, horrible, violent white supremacists? >> there is concern about it. but these individuals are caught between the president and the nra. so, you know, how do they guard and express that concern? to stove's point, the congress is going to do what? you may get some action in the house after labor day, but then what happens in the senate? the general mood, as the poll reflects, 55%, and i would suspect that number is probably

higher, of americans would like to see some forward action. >> and doesn't mitch mcconnell have to respond to that at some point? >> you would think. >> the nra is a lot weaker than it's ever been. >> you would think. but the pressure, downward pressure on these candidates who are running for re-election or running for election for the first time is enormous. and the question that, you know, a lot of americans are asking is, so you value your re-election more than the safety of my child in their classroom, than the safety of my family when we go to the theater or we go shopping? and i think that's a legitimate question to ask. it doesn't mean that you need to have draconian gun laws in place. a lot of states have strict gun laws, my state of maryland, very strict gun laws. the fact of the matter is that there are still big, gaping holes that need to be filled where congress has to act. and i think it's going to take people, actually, putting the

kind of pressure that's greater than what the nra and the president is doing on these members to get them to move. and that maybe means unelecting a few of them. >> may i add something? >> yeah. >> i would like to agree with mike and add something. i served in congress 16 years. michael knows as well. i can't tell you how many republican members of congress i would speak to that would say personally they support strengthening background checks or banning cop-killer bullets but they feared the far right backed by gun supporters. when he they fear what happens in schools more than they fear what happens in a primary, maybe we'll see some action. >> something that's ricochetting around the political atmosphere here, when you hear from congresswomen omar and tlaib today. they'll respond first time together to all the rhetoric and what we're seeing with the president's tweets, trying to

make them the face of the democratic party. steve israel, does this divide the caucus or does it rally the caucus around them because of what the president persuaded t netanyahu to do? >> it's clear to the caucus you've got bright, political minds in the caucus. it's clear that this entire thing say tactic by president trump. you're right, andrea. he wants to make three or four people the face of the democratic party, despite the fact that the vast majority, maybe 95% of democrats in the caucus fundamentally disagree with them on things like bds and condemn their anti-semitic comments. when they do the stuff that they've done, you know, calling for a boycott of bill maher, as they did this weekend and retweeting an anti-semitic holocaust cartoon, they play right into donald trump's hands and give him a victory that he should not have. >> nancy pelosi is right on the spot there when they come back.

>> yeah, she is. and i think you probably will see nancy exert a firmer hand in some of this, because to congressman israel's point, now we're in the game. you get past labor day, you are three, four months out from the first caucus in iowa. the presidential campaigns can't afford to have this kind of narrative dictating the terms of their engagement. the caucus under nancy's leadership wants to do something in terms of real legislation to put, rightly, political pressure on the gop going into next year. this then becomes a bigger distraction. i expect nancy to have a firmer hand on this, particularly given that these individuals seem not to really get the point here from their tweets and the things that they're doing, that they don't understand how much damage they're causing broadly to democrats across the country. >> and we have to get through the israeli elections. >> and we still have that.

>> michael steele, congressman steve israel, thank you both so much. >> thank you. troubled waters. tensions rising once again between the u.s. and iran as tehran warns washington to stay away from a recently freed oil tanker. stay with us. freed oil tanker stay with us [dog barks] [dog panting] [dogs barking] [dogs growling] [dogs whimpering] (vo) the subaru crosstrek. dog tested. dog approved. [dog barks] woman 1: this... woman 2: ...this... man 1: ...this is my body of proof. man 2: proof of less joint pain... woman 3: ...and clearer skin. man 3: proof that i can fight psoriatic arthritis... woman 4: ...with humira. woman 5: humira targets and blocks a specific source of inflammation

that contributes to both joint and skin symptoms. it's proven to help relieve pain, stop further irreversible joint damage, and clear skin in many adults. humira is the number one prescribed biologic for psoriatic arthritis. (avo): 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. woman 6: ask your rheumatologist about humira. woman 7: go to mypsaproof.com to see proof in action.

woman 7: go to mypsaproof.com do your asthma symptoms ever hold you back? about 50% of people with severe asthma 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.

in an nbc exclusive, lester holt in tehran, speaking with omar zarif as tensions escalate in the region. and i'm very sorry to interrupt. we're going to bring that to you in a moment. police commissioner james o'neill just entered the room and is speaking about the garner case. >> today i'm here to announce my decision in the disciplinary case of police officer daniel pantaleo, accused of violating the conduct policy july 17th, 2014. it is a decision that necessarily requires fairness and impartiality for mr. garner, who died following that encounter with police.

it was also a decision that requires fairness and impartiality for officer pantaleo, sent by this department to assess a situation and take appropriate police action. first, i will discuss how i reached my decision and then i will answer any questions you have on the topic. for some time prior to july 17th, 2014, neighborhood residents purposely avoided the area in and directly around tompkinsville park and staten island due to criminal activity. drug dealers worked at the edges of the park, across the street, selling narcotics, handful of cigarettes that new york tacks had not been paid on them. liquor store nearby sold alcohol to people who would drink that alcohol in the park, people would sometimes use drugs, urinate and pass out on benches there. that summer, the week before that, there had been reports of thefts and robberies in the

park. 911, 311 and other complaints of residents on an ongoing bases. warnings and summonses were issued in some cases and other cases arrests were made. on the day officer pantaleo was sent with another officer to conduct an enforcement operation. when the second officer observed mr. garner hand out cigarettes in exchange for money they approached mr. garner to make an arrest. that offense could have resulted in a summens, but he refused to provide identification which meant he would have been brought to the precinct for processing. for several minutes on that widely viewed video, mr. garner makes it abundantly clear he will not go willingly with the police officers. he refused to cooperate with the arrest and to comply with lawful orders. the video also makes clear that officer pantaleo's original efforts to take mr. garner into custody were appropriate, in that he initially attempted to as sanctioned by the police

department. officer pantaleo first grabbed mr. garner's right wrist and attempted a technique in preparation for handcuffs to be used. mr. garner immediately twisted and pulled while repeatedly telling the fors to not touch him. officer pantaleo wrapped his arms around mr. garner's upper body. occupy to that point in this tense and rapidly evolving situation, there was nothing to suggest that officer pantaleo attempted to place mr. garner in a chokehold but what happened next is the matter we must address. the two men stumbled backwards toward the large plate glass window, the storefront behind them and officer pantaleo's back made contact with the glass, causing the window to visibly buckle and warp. the person videotaping the episode later testified at the nypd trial that he thought both men would crash through the glass. at that point in the video that officer pantaleo is seen with his hands clasped together and his left forearm pressed against

mr. garner's neck in what constitutes a chokehold. nypd court ruled that while certainly not preferable, that hold was acceptable during that brief moment in time because the risk of falling through the window was so high. but that extingent circumstance no longer existed, the court found, when officer pantaleo and mr. garner moved to the ground. as he balanced himself on the sidewalk on his hands and knees, deputy commissioner rose marie found that officer pantaleo consciously disregarded the substantial and unjustifiable risk of maneuver explicitly prohibited by the department. during the struggle, officer pantaleo had the opportunity to readjust his grip to a less lethal alternative but did not make use of that opportunity. instead, even once mr. garner was moved to his side on the ground with his left arm behind his back and his right hand still open and extended, officer

pantaleo kept his hands clasped and maintained the chokehold. mr. garner's obvious distress is confirmed when he coughs and grimaces. moreover, commissioner maldonado found that officer pantaleo's conduct caused and recklessness caused multilayered sbrernl bruising and hemorrhage that caused substantial pain and was a significant factor in triggering an asthma attack. for all of these reasons taken together, even after reviewing officer pantaleo's commendable service record of nearly 300 arrests and 14 department medals earned leading up to that day, commissioner maldonado recommended that he be dismissed from the department. in making this penalty recommendation, she wrote, this tribunal recognizes from the outset mr. garner was not compliant and argumentative and further notes that the patrol

guide allows officers to use reasonable force when necessary to take an uncooperative individual into custody. what the patrol guide did not allow, however, even when this individual was resisting arrest, was the use of a prohibited chokehold. as you know, a number of external authorities have asked many of the same questions we have about this incident. on august 19th, 2014, about a month after mr. garner's death, the staten island district attorney's office announced it would impanel a grand jury to present evidence on that manner. on december 3rd, 2014, those 23 staten island residents voted not to indict officer pantaleo, clearing him of criminal wrongdoing. that same day the united states attorney general announced the u.s. department of justice would conduct its own investigation into mr. garner's death and weigh bringing civil rights charges against officer pantaleo. in the intervening years, the justice department made ongoing

requests of the nypd, asking us to delay our civil rights internal process until their investigation was complete. from one administration to the next with no action by federal prosecutors and so on july 21st, 2018, we decided to begin nypd proceedings. members of the public in general and mr. garner's family in particular have grown understandably impatient. the trial began may 13th, 2019. july 16th, 2019, one day before the five-year statute of limitations expired, the justice department announced it would not file federal charges against officer pantaleo. then on august 2nd, 2019, with officer pantaleo's nypd trial concluded, trials commissioner maldon maldonado concluded that use of chokehold was reckless and constituted a gross deviation from the standard of conduct established for a new york city

police officer. after noting that officer pantaleo had admitted he was aware that chokeholds are prohibited by the department, she further concluded, with strongly worded and repeated warnings about the potentially lethal effects of chokeholds throughout training materials, it's evident that the department made its 2006 recruits keenly aware of the inherent dangers associated with the application of pressure to the neck. given his training, a new york city police officer could reasonably be expected to be aware of the potentially lethal effects connected with the use of a prohibitive chokehold and be vigilant. from the start of this process, i was determined to carry out my responsibility as police commissioner unaffected by public opinions demanding one outcome over another. i examined the totality of the circumstances and relied on the facts. and i stand before you today, confident that i've reached the correct decision.

and that has certainly not made it an easy decision. i served for nearly 34 years as a new york city cop before becoming police commissioner. i can tell you that had i been in officer pantaleo's situation, i may have made similar mistakes. and had i made those mistakes, i would have wished i had used the arrival of back-up officers to more time to make that arrest and release my grip before it became a chokehold. every time i watch that video, i say to myself, as probably all of you do, to mr. garner, don't do it. comply. officer pantaleo, don't do it. i said that about the decisions made by both officer pantaleo and mr. garner, but none of us can take back our decisions, most especially when it leads to the death of another human being. i was not in officer pantaleo's situation that day.

i was chief of patrol and later that year chief of department. in that position, i proposed our neighborhood police so that the same cops would be in the same neighborhoods every day so that relationships would replace preconceptions, so that problem solving and prevention would become tools officers were trained in and supported in using. and, therefore, one of the greatest challenges of the police profession here in new york city and elsewhere will always remain arresting someone who intends to resist that arrest. communication and de-escalation techniques are employed where possible. more often than the police and public alike than would prefer, levels varying levels of force are used. acceptable levels of force when necessary because police cannot otherwise do their job. every day in new york, people receive summenses or are arrested by officers without any physical force being used but some people choose to verbally

and/or physically resist the enforcement action lawfully being taken against them. those situations are unpredictable and dangerous to everyone involved. the street is never the right place to argue the appropriateness of an arrest. that is what our courts are for. being a police officer is one of the hardest jobs in the world. that is not a statement to elicit sympathy from those we serve. it's a fact. cops have to make choices, sometimes very quickly, every single day. some are split second, life and death choices, often times they are choices that will be thoroughly and repeatedly examined by those with much more time to think about them than the police officer had. and those decisions are scrutinized and second guessed, both fairly and unfairly. no one believes that officer pantaleo got out of bed that day

thinking he would make choices and take actions during an otherwise routine arrest that would lead to another person's death, but an officer's choices and actions even made under extreme pressure, matter. it's unlikely mr. garner thought he was in such poor health that a brief struggle with police would cause his death. he should have decided against resisting arrest, but a man with a family lost his life and that is an irreversible tragedy. and a hardworking police officer, a family man who took this job to do good, to make a difference in his home community, has now lost his chosen career. and that is a different kind of tragedy. in this case, the unintended consequence of mr. garner's death must have a consequence of its own. therefore, i agree with the deputy commissioner of trials legal findings and recommendations. it is clear that daniel pantaleo can no longer effectively serve as a new york city police officer. in carrying out the court's verdict in this case, i take no

pleasure. i know that many will disagree with this decision and that is their right. there are absolutely no victors here today. not the garner family, not the community at large, and certainly not the courageous men and women of the police department who put their own lives on the line every single day in service to the people of this great city. today is a day of reckoning, but can also be a day of reconciliation. we must move forward together as one city, determined to secure safety for all new yorkers and safety for every police officer working daily to protect all of us. and i'll take your questions. >> this decision that you said is very difficult. [ inaudible ] last couple of days so difficult that you decide you would rather leave the department than make the decision today?

>> i'm not going to talk about rose, the decision that rose marie made, affirmed by deputy tucker. it's an extremely difficult decision. >> when did you actually make this decision? was it up to the wire or did you make this decision a couple of days ago? >> mark you know me long enough by now this was not an easy decision. it's not something that i could make over a few hours. i've been thinking about this since the day i was sworn in as police commissioner. the decision was made in the last couple of days. tony? >> commissioner, any determination made about termination rights? >> whenever contributions he made to the pension system, he'll get back.

marcia? [ inaudible question ] >> i know you talked about reconciliation. are you worried about losing the support of [ inaudible question ] >> immediately i'm sending out my remarks and the video of this press conference so they know what you all know. i've been a cop a long time. and if i was still a cop, i probably would be mad at me. i would. you're not looking out for us. but i am. it's my responsibility as police commissioner to look out for the city and certainly to look out for the new york city police officers. they took this job to make a difference. and you all know the city has been transformed. had a lot of help, but it's the

cops out there right now and the thousands that have come before us that continue to make this city safe. some will be angry and i have a great executive staff. these police officers do a terrific job each and every day and will have to work through this. it's a resilient organization. [ inaudible question ] >> i did this based on the evidence and testimony at the trial. >> commissioner, our understanding is that negotiations went back and forth friday and saturday and then at one point, you were told or instructed by city hall that things had to go a certain way. >> no. that's not -- this is my decision. there are a couple possible outcomes but this is the decision that the police commissioner makes. and i'm -- this is a

disciplinary case. like other disciplinary cases, it's my decision. rocco? i'm going to get to you in a second. hold on. rocco? [ inaudible question ] >> i did not follow the trial day-to-day. i waited for the testimony to come up and the evidence to come up. my staff does disciplinary cases in my office and we got rosemarie's decision and moved forward. right here, the blond hair. [ inaudible question ] >> i have not. commissioner tucker has attempted to reach out to them, couple of different phone calls. didn't happen too long ago. we're waiting for a call back. in the corner over there? >> have you spoken to officer pantaleo, or is this the first time? >> this is the first time. [ inaudible question ] >> i talked with mayor di blasio

about process and possible outcomes. ashley? >> commissioner, in her decision, indicated that pantaleo and also raised the question about credibility of other officers in this case. can you speak to how that played into that? >> this whole situation transpired in seconds. i'm sure no one in this room had to accept police had to arrest somebody in a physical struggle. if they could recount step for step what they did, i think that would be nothing short of a miracle. this is the decision rosemarie made. this was affirmed by the first deputy commissioner. i'm agreeing with that. yes? >> are you making this decision to agree with the judge or are you making this decision because

you believe it is also the right decision? >> there is a department trial. there's a process. rosemarie made the decision, confirmed by ben tucker, and i agree with both of their findings. >> can you speak about if eric garner had not resisted and just complied. you also said you wished that officer pantaleo had waited for backup. what is the message to your officers about this decision? >> immediately after this in 2014, ben tucker was the deputy commissioner training still at the time. we put all our police officers through a three-day course, clueing de-escalation. we've done a lot of other things, fair and impartial policing and every police officer is wearing the body one camera now. a lot of things came out of this incident. every time there's an incident that affects the nypd, there's always something to learn. right behind?

[ inaudible question ] how do you square those two things? and is the body cam working? >> officer pantaleo had 289 arrests. as far as we can tell, searching through all the records, no other person he arrested was injured. he did have a number of resisting arrests, which is not unusual. he had some ccrvs. the one that was -- where it was substantiated, that was a bad stop. not use of force. all this has to be taken into totality. out of that 289 arrests, there were a number of gun arrests. what does the nypd do each and every day? we try to reduce gun violence in this city. so, i have to look at his record.

that's part of the disciplinary system. [ inaudible question ] >> impact on the community a factor in any of your decision making? >> i'm not going to stand up here and say i didn't think about that but i had to be guided by the facts brought out in the department trial and sent up to our office. i see a lot of journalists here that went through 2014, the protests, the murder of raphael ramos and liu. that's never out of my mind. i think about that every day, whether there's a department trial or not. i can't stand up here and say i didn't think about that. but that's not how i made my final decision. right here. [ inaudible question ]

>> did you personally believe this outcome constitutes justice? >> this is the outcome of our trial. we needed it to be fair sband impartial. it was a fair and right here. >> what would you say to the family right now? >> we say it is going to be a fair and impartial trial. make no mistake about it. it is a tragedy for the family. i fully understand that. mr. garner was somebody's son or dad. everybody understands that. >> a couple of questions -- >> it is an immediate termination. >> was there anything that you disagree with? >> i agree with the content of the decision. >> who didn't go yet? >> right here. [ inaudible question ]

did any part of the other people testify brought up on internal charges? >> after this arrest from internal affairs looked at each officer that was involved in this. there were a number of sifl y civilian witnesses. [ inaudible question ] >> so i can't remove myself from the fact that i was a uniform cop for 34 years. i think that's what makes this so difficult that every member of law enforcement in this country that works and keeps

this country safe and the city safe looked at that and said that could possibly be me. and, it is in my dna and it is who i am. but, as police commissioner, i have to think about the city. i have to think about the roles and ranks of nypd and make sure that people follow in the back. >> what's your biggest concern for the department? >> i think i stated that. if i were still a police officer i would not be happy. but, we have been through a lot of things in the nypd. it is great history. i know that men and women who do this jobs are resilient.

somebody calls for help, dials 911 and somebody flags them down. they're not going to think of why they took this job, they'll help that person no matter who they are. >> we heard an emotional and extraordinary news conference from police commissioner o'neill in new york city saying that today is a day of reckoning but also a day of reconciliation. he says at one point after being a cop for 34 years, if he was still a cop, he would disagree of what he announced today. the firing of the officer five years after the death of eric garner as a result of a choke hold was ruled as reckless was initially justifiable when mr. garner was thrown back against the window which began to buckled. once he's on the ground, sustained use of the choke hold was indeed reckless by a judge.

rosemary -- sorry, don't have her name in front of me. the judge ruled it was reckless and he should be fired. that ruling is a month or so ago and now followed up by the commission. mayor deblasio had been informed of the decision but says it was his decision and not the mayor's decision. joining us by phone, retired nypd detective. also, shawn henry, former executive director of the fbi and our national security analyst, here onset with me in washington is shawna thomas, washington bureau chief for vice news. officer clacston. >> really professional. i am not surprised, i know he's

in a difficult position and he expressed that and being he's the head of the police officer there in new york and so he just played a straight down the middle, expresses disappointments and frustration and difficulties of making a decision. he did so out of the obligation of his duty and responsibility as a commissioner. >> i am not surprised the decision he made given the recommendation and much of the evidence that came out during the course of the department trial. it was just a matter of how he was going to present it. how he would be able to address ordeal or recognize the divisions that not only the activist community or the family of garner had that also to understand the position of the police officer. he's still in charge of how they feel and what they think about

this decision. >> and shawn henry. when you see the process that he went through, first of all, the police department is five years and police department was waiting on the advice of the department of justice starting in the obama administration as to whether there was a civil rights case after a grand jury in staten island in the community that the officer served decided not to indict him on criminal charges. there was a doj investigation and the trump investigation decided the day before the statue of limitations would expire not to proceed on the civil rights case. the garner family waited for five years. what do you think the reaction will be? it is going to be a strong reaction. >> i think there will be strong reaction on both sides.

it is important to recognize and not just said the way chief o'neill handled it. it was obvious listening to him and the anguish in his voice. he mentions multiple times that he reviewed this and looked at the totality of the circumstances and looked at the judge's respond and the department's decision. he made this decision because he felt it was a fire bullet offense and the officer knowingly violating police procedures. >> he's actually right, every officer look for something like that and how do you respond? you don't know until you are there of how it plays out.

the vast majority of successfully and professionally resolving this. this is a tragedy that occurs here and chief o'neill really i think went through some difficult times making the decision. we'll see anguish on both sides and i don't think you will see anybody who's totally satisfied with what happened here. i don't know how they could be given the circumstances, andrea. >> and shawna thomas, we'll hear from the family, i believe we'll hear from mayor de blasio. so much emotions on all sides. what the police chief says, the one thing that's irreversible is the tragedy for this highly decorated officer. what's irreversible is the loss of human life. >> eric garner had a family. the police commissioner said that. he's never coming back. the thing we can think about is between what happened to michael

brown and eric garner in missouri, what it did was it started a conversation. the commissioner said a couple of things after eric garner's death. everyone is wearing body cameras now. they had to take deescalation classes and how they need to act in the community. all of those things are what needed to have in the police department and a lot of police departments. that's something that can come out of that. i am interested to hear what the family says. >> the bottom leine is this man was selling cigarettes and he was unarmed and got out of control. he lost his life. >> that's why we saw people take to the streets. that's why this conversation continues. that's why commissioner o'neill tried to handle this today in the way he did. >> shawna. one of this things he said certainly after we began our conversation is that it lasted too long. that's one of the things they also learn.

we'll have to lever it there for now. this is a conversation that's going to continually be hearing from all sides. that does it for this edition of andrea reports. remember to follow us online and on twitter. here is ali velshi and stephanie ruhle. >> thank you, andrea, we'll continue with the breaking news. nypd has fired officer pantaleo. he used a choke hold in eric garner's death. i want to warn you because you will be seeing new video of this incident. it is tough to watch. it is important to show you how this went down. >> put your hands down. >> i can't breathe. >> once