: but we all have to be safe. ms. robinson: because we're all in this together. narrator: making our school buildings safer. ms. robinson: working together, we can make it a great year. narrator: because the california teachers association knows quality public schools make a better california for all of us. well, good evening to you once again, as we continue now our special live coverage. the extended i digs of our broadcast as we cross the top of the hour here on the east coast. so begins day 1,350 of the trump administration and leaves 34 days to go now until the presidential election. tonight president trump and former vice president joe biden came face to face and then some for the first 2020 presidential debate. we have seen our share of norm-busting moments during this trump presidency. during this campaign.

but that debate tonight went well beyond what we have ever seen. the topics ranged from the supreme court nominee to the pandemic. the night was chaotic. it was tough to watch on television. it got even ugly at times. it featured razor-sharp exchanges and personal attacks. >> the 200,000 people that have died on his watch. >> you were here, it would be 2 million people. >> here's the deal -- >> he has no plan for health care. he has no one. like almost everything else he talks about. he does not have a plan. he doesn't have a plan. and the fact is this man doesn't know what he's talking about. >> are you willing to tell the american people tonight whether or not you will support either ending the filibuster or packing the court -- >> whatever position i take on that, that will become the issue. >> he doesn't want to answer the question. >> will we shut up, man. >> is it true that you paid $750

in federal income taxes each of those two years? >> i paid millions of dollars in taxes. millions of dollars of income tax. and let me just tell you, there was a story in one of the papers -- >> show us your tax returns. you're the worst president america has ever had. >> the mayor of moscow's wife gave your son $3.5 million. >> that is not true. >> what did he do to deserve it? what did he do with burisma to deserve -- >> speaking of my son, the way you talk about the military, the way you talk about them being losers and being -- and just being suckers, my son was in iraq. he spent a year there. he got -- he got the bronze star. he got the conspicuous service medal. he was not a loser. he was a patriot and the people left behind there were heros. >> really? are you talking about hunter? are you talking about hunter? >> i'm talking about my son beau biden. >> i don't know beau. i know hunter. >> are you willing tonight to condemn white supremacists and

militia groups. >> sure. sure i'm prepared to do that. give me a name. who would you like me to condemn? >> the proud boys. >> stand back and stand by. i'll tell you what, somebody's got to do something about antifa and the left. >> for more, we are joined by my colleague ari melber, who is obviously the host of the 6:00 p.m. eastern hour on this network. also happens to be our chief legal correspondent. ari's assignment going into tonight was fact checking this evening. and ari, i saw daniel dale on twitter, the fact checker par excellence thus far in this administration say to his followers before the event tonight, look, i'm going to try to keep up in real time. some of the obvious whoppers are going to have to wait until kind of an after action report. even fact checking, ari, is going by norms that were blown up tonight because none of the

norms of political behavior and presidential debates can be applied to what we witnessed, but i digress. what do you have? >> well, i appreciate it, brian. i don't think you digress because you're hitting it on the head and a lot of people will witness that, make up their own minds how much blatant violation of the rules there was. we'll walk through just a couple because fact checking as you said is an important part of this. one brief moment came in an exchange over violent crime. take a look. >> violent crime went down 17%, 15% in our administration. it's gone up on his watch. >> went down much more in ours. >> fact check, joe biden is correct, the violent crime went down quite a bit during the obama biden administration. we'll put this up on the screen. went down about 16%. true in the ballpark of what he said. it did not surge under donald trump, though, in fact, it's been stagnant about 0.4%. that makes biden's other claim an exaggeration and trump's

denial completely false because he said it was way better than that. another one we want to point to, he claimed the prescription drug prices have gone down. brian, you don't need to be a health care expert or a journalist, you might just be any person in america who knows that's false. prescription drug prices have gone way up. you see it here. we're tracking that. it's a generalized problem, but certainly has not improved under the trump administration. indeed, very little evidence they've taken policy measures there. i want to keep moving, brian, because i don't want this segment to go as long as the debate that at times was hard to watch. the third and final one is the most interesting as we go towards november, something donald trump different than previous claims. he shaded voting by mail. tonight he had a different tone he said, you know what? this might take months. i would say fact check, mostly true, in that we may not see an election result that is certified and final on the big night when you and rachel and joy and everyone is anchoring.

it could take weeks or longer. i would remind everyone that the famous florida revolution, bush v. gore, was well after a month. this could be a very long race, indeed. brian? >> as the expression goes, i'm old enough to remember bush v. gore and i don't want to see that movie again. ari melber, always a pleasure to spend time with you. thank you. i'll be watching your effort, 6:00 p.m. eastern time tomorrow evening. with us tonight for our next interview segment, robert gibbs, former obama campaign senior adviser, former white house press secretary under one barack obama. robert costa, national political reporter for "the washington post." he's also moderator of "washington week" on pbs. and elysia menendez. she is host of "american voices," weekends, 6:00 p.m. eastern on this very network. she also happens to be the host of the podcast "latina to latina." and elysia, i'd like to begin with you and your reaction to

the moment tonight that several guests have already speculated will be the keeper, will be where the damage was. the president of the united states offered the opportunity on live television to denounce white supremacists, proud boys by name and their collective ilk. the phrase he used, as david plouffe informed us, has already been converted into a logo that is making the rounds tonight. we have the image off of social media. and it's the president's words. "stand back. stand by". elysia, there is your country in 2020. >> deeply, deeply disturbing, brian. you know, i think the president, given a chance to disavow white supremacists, even if he had, perhaps those remarks would have wrung a little hollow, given what he has said and done with

the protests across this country in favor of racial equality, racial justice. given what he is doing to asylum seekers at our border. given what he is doing to immigrants in detention. if you look at his policies, the answer are there, and yet given the opportunity, rather than put it to bed, he chose to insight. and so that will tell voters a lot of what theyed into to know. i mean, i also think, though, that the fact that we are talking about this is telling because we know that the -- the thing that is top of voters' minds, poll after poll, the economy, health care, his handling of the coronavirus pandemic. it's almost as though those topics got glossed over because the president refused to play by the rules, refused to honor the debate moderator, so the serious policies, whether they be white supremacy in this country and the threat of white nationalists. whether they be the economy, health care, the pandemic, he missed an opportunity to give

his condolences to the 200,000-plus americans who have died, their families who are now living without their loved ones. so across the board, no opportunity to talk about policy when if you are running for president, you should have both a vision for the next four years and a track record from the past four years that you are selling to the american people in the absence of that, what we heard was a lot of hateful rhetoric. >> mr. gibbs, indeed, the president missed more than one opportunity at condolences tonight. not his strong suit. let me ask you for your honest answer. did joe biden, in your view, affirmatively win tonight's contest or did donald trump soil the presidency over 90 minutes or some combination thereof? >> well, i think there's no doubt it was an epic disaster for america and for american

democracy over 90 minutes. i -- it was embarrassing to watch. it was exhausting to watch. i think biden had his moments, particularly when he looked straight at the camera and tried to talk directly to the american people. i think those moments were -- were more successful than others for him, and i think he probably did as well as he could do, given what was on the stage. brian, i think we have to hear from the presidential commission on debates tomorrow. we -- we can't do two more of these. this wasn't a debate. this was a total debacle. we need to hear from them and what they're going to do to enforce the rules or to change the rules. the election is far too important. this decision in this year is too important to do that two more times. it's a travesty and it's time for them to step up and do something about it. it just -- it was a terrible, terrible night for democracy. >> well, let me push back and just say, well, i'll complicate

things by saying politely the presidential commission on debates is kind of affectionately known as the hoop skirt of its ilk. not a thoroughly modern organization. what -- including but not limited to a kill switch, what can we expect to hear from that group which is still going by a rule book and a set of procedures from old-timy days? >> well, we should welcome them to 2020 and we should hand them a new calender. we should certainly threaten to have a kill switch on microphones. and we can't have a free-form talk period where -- where there's -- there's no rules. there have to be rules. and this whole notion i heard in a couple of earlier segments, well, everybody's got to agree to a rule change. i mean, did anybody watching tonight think that the two people on that stage, particularly the president of the united states, was playing by the rules? i mean, this is -- this is more

important than that. we have -- they have to do something. if they -- if they don't, they need to get out of the way and the moderators need to take charge. somebody needs to take charge. i have much more faith in what's coming up than -- than i do tonight, but i think the commission has to take control of this. we -- we've -- debates are revered in our history. lincoln and douglas, it was a long time ago, but we've had nixon/kennedy. we have big moments meted out through democracy in our debates and tonight simply soiled all of that. >> robert costa, the president was prepped for tonight's event. the prep apparently consisted of someone saying to him, toss it out there, speak when you feel like it. i want to know everything you've learned since the end of the debate. >> speaking to republicans throughout the night on text message and a few phone calls,

during the debate it's evident that this cacophony in cleveland tonight was also part of president trump's strategy. in the sense that he wanted to rouse his base, get them back to 2016 levels tonight. this was not so much about making overtures to independent voters or new voters. it was about consolidating his base. and he did so but he also raised serious questions about american democracy. his answer, as elysia said, about proud boys, stand back, stand by, also with an answer about civil unrest. not necessarily directly in any way discouraging it, continuing to talk about the integrity of the election as something that's eroded to the point of no return. we are just days away, weeks away from this election where the president, the commander in chief, is undermining the system in which this takes place. and one of the institutions that was also undermined tonight was a modern one that really began in 1960, the presidential debate.

>> elysia, how about the fact -- and we talked about this with claire mccaskill -- his kind of dissonance. the third-person distance between him and, for example, the city of new york. his home. he -- he talked about it vis-a-vis the pandemic. it may not be able to come back. the way he spoke about cities and states compared to the way presidents speak about cities and states in the country that they were elected to govern. >> completely disassociated. a lack of empathy. but, brian, we know all of that. we've seen all of that. so in some ways, that was not particularly surprising. i think we've underscored a lot, you know, all of the lies he told about voter fraud. the lies he's been telling for the past several weeks. and the ways in which those undermine our democracy. though undermine our election. but what i also heard from a lot

of organizers tonight, especially people who organize young voters, people who organize latino voters, is that they felt that there were other costs to the way that the president behaved. one, that it took away from joe biden's opportunity to speak about his own record, to speak about his policy vision. given that i know this is hard for, you know, we political nerds to remember, but there is a broad swath of the electorate that still feels they don't know enough about joe biden. this would have been his opportunity to fill in some of those gaps. and then the second piece of it, which i think is even more disturbing, which is if you are a voter who for the first time is coming into this election process, if you are someone who feels that you're on the outside or the margins of this process and you tuned in for five, ten minutes tonight and watched that chaos, then you tuned out. and that has a cost to our democracy and has a cost to this election, and it will be hard to

get those people back to re-engage those people if what they did is tune in tonight and say this doesn't represent who we are. this doesn't represent who we want to be and i am not sure i buy into this process. >> mr. gibbs, this calls for another honest answer. did a single vote move as a result of tonight, in your view? >> i can't imagine that many did. i mean, keeping in mind, brian, that many people that watched this debate, even those that said they would watch, very few of them said they were undecided. to robert's point about getting his based charged up, i think the challenge that someone like donald trump has in a debate like this is the needing to change the electorate composition for himself to get back some of the disaffected voters that supported him in 2016 but have watch the type of behavior and watched the type of chaos that was just talked about, and that isn't bringing any of those voters back into the fold. that's why when you see the

polling at 42 or 43 or 44, it's almost always below what he got in a state or nationally just four years ago. but i think on the whole, no, these things don't move much in terms of vote and numbers. and i don't think anything moved appreciably tonight. >> robert costa, a question i've asked you before on this broadcast and others. about the republicans who are on your speed dial, and as we're now down to 34 days, there is no changing the fact that they have hitched their wagon to this president. they have hitched what we know to be the future of what passes for the modern incarnation, trump's republican party, to this guy and whatever happens on election day. >> there are many republicans, brian, who are privately telling me tonight after this performance by president trump that they fear the 196 barry

goldwater type defeat by president trump in the coming weeks. and some of them privately don't mind that possibility because they think the republican party needs to somehow reimagine itself in the wake of president trump. but there are many privately and publicly who say that president trump has already transformed a party. that it can no-go back. that the bonds to conservatism and norms of american democracy have already been severed and they can't be put back together again and they're with president trump. that's going to be the key tension to watch, brian. if president trump contests the results of this election and its integrity, who stands with him, who stands back? >> robert costa, robert gibbs, elysia menendez, thank you for staying up with us and lending your voices to this coverage. as this special edition of "the 11th hour" continues, here is just some of the discussion on the topic of the president's

decision to aggressively push forward a supreme court nominee this close to the election. >> we won the election. elections have consequences. we have the senate. we have the white house. and we have a phenomenal nominee. we won the election and therefore we have the right to choose her. and very few people knowingly would say otherwise. and by the way, the democrats, they wouldn't even think about not doing it. if they had -- the only difference is they'll try and do it faster. there's no way they would give it up. they had merrick garland, but the problem is they didn't have the election, so they were stopped. >> for more, we welcome to the broadcast susan glasser, staff writer for "the new yorker." probably the most highest quoted journalist on this broadcast who doesn't work with this broadcast. she happens to be with us with guy she lives with, peter baker, chief white house correspondent

for "the new york times." together as a married couple, they are co-authors of the new book "the man who ran washington: the life and times of james a. baker iii." the book has landed on my front porch. the book has also landed on this debate night where we would usually have time to discuss the book and only the book. welcome to you both. susan, we get to talk to your husband all time. what a thrill to have you on. and i'll begin with this. while i can't wait to dig into the work you've both complied, what would james a. baker of texas make of what passes for the republican party as we have this conversation right now, tonight? >> well, i heard at least on a rival network they were allowed to use the word blank show on live television. i have a feeling jim baker, known for his colorful

expletives, and he used a lot of them after watching something like this tonight. honestly, this isn't like something we've ever seen really in american politics. and, you know, baker, although he fought hard and in a partisan sense. this is a man who always wore a tie and a suit and had a chance of decorum. and that obviously has been blown up in a way that probably doesn't serve anybody very well, especially those of us on the debate stage. isn't that right, brian? >> i watched the conversation you both had with my friend and clig nicolle wallace. i was surprised to learn he is not a never trumper. in fact, what's the expression he used, he going to hold his nose, peter, and vote for donald trump. which may surprise a good number of people. >> i think it will surprise a good number of people. it's interesting jim baker in so many ways is un-trump.

the things he stands for philosophically and mentally and constitutionally are so different than donald trump. he's an internationalist. he's a free trader. he believes in seriousness of purpose. he's a very tough partisan. we saw that again and again throughout his year. a jim baker believed in doing business. jim baker believed in getting things done. he believed sitting down with democrats and cutting deals. they would never have gone months without a coronavirus relief package the way we're seeing it today. put out in stage to became the way the president did tonight. that would have been anathema to him. while he has not broken with his party, he finds trump to be very, very disturbing. he's used words like "crazy" and "nuts" with us when we talked about it. i think that would be something that he would watch and, you know, not feel that he was wrong about. >> susan, i'm really curious to

hear your answer to this, again, because you're the most-quoted journalist not on this broadcast. we follow every word you write for -- he had a healthy amount of disdain for the ivy league types who populated foggy bottom. baker is not that. as he as good as he was lucky in terms of relationship with 41 and do you define him as every inch a statesperson? >> well, those are good questions, brian. he was a person of his era. i don't know how he would have fared in the trump era. the truth is from the end of watergate to the end of the cold war, there really wasn't a significant matter of domestic politics or international politics that didn't have jim baker involved in some way.

generally speaking, his background as a lawyer, hi obsession with discipline and preparation, but his oikts were generally to seek a deal. he wasn't into zero-sum politics. that made him a another guy not to be buried but come out with something that he or she could live. with. when reagan had a supreme court nominee who pushed to nominate sandra day o'connor, the first woman to the court. the conservatives were against this to let them into the oval office for a meeting. he was looking something to get reagan points of the american people. and, of course, trump has chosen the exact opposite for us with this current supreme court appointment. and, really, with moech of his choices as president, and so i

do think, you know, and if that sense, baker has an accomplished record with a deal breaker you can't imagine that happening. >> full transparency, our guests are in the same host, separated by mere feet from living room to kitchen. we are thrilled to have them as a couple, and in this case, in this context, as co-authors of an exciting new biography of a man with huge figure. the life and times of james b. baker iii. just out today. to susan glasser and the guy she lives with, peter baker, thank you for coming on tonight. we appreciate it. that's going to do it for this extended bit of our coverage tonight. thank you for staying with us for our extended edition of the

"the 11th hour." our post-debate live coverage continues with our friend ari melber right after the next break. these folks, they don't have time to go to the post office

they have businesses to grow customers to care for lives to get home to they use stamps.com print discounted postage for any letter any package any time right from your computer all the services of the post office plus ups only cheaper get our special tv offer a 4-week trial plus postage and a digital scale go to stamps.com/tv and never go to the post office again.

but my dream is to help young women feel empowered. i'd like to have online courses teaching them body positivity and self-confidence. but when covid hit, i needed a financial plan to make it a reality. without andrea, my financial advisor from northwestern mutual, it didn't feel possible. she really put me at ease. andrea has my best interests at heart. she protected my dream. 12:30 a.m. out east. reaction rolling around the nation to this first debate of 2020 which honestly often felt a

lot like 2020, chaotic and messy. loud. hard to sit through at times with petty clashes and recriminations that were not just, let's be clear, the random result of the system or another political squabble, but quite specifically the intent and directional result of donald trump and trumpism at war with the rules, the fact and anyone and anything that represents those rules and facts. >> jobs, good paying jobs. >> let him finish, sir. >> he doesn't know how to do that. >> you just lost the left. you agreed with bernie sanders on a plan -- >> folks -- folks, do you have any idea what this clown's doing? >> why won't you answer that question? >> because the question is -- the question is -- >> the radical left -- >> will you shut up, man. >> that was really a productive segment, wasn't it? keep yapping, man. it's hard to get any word in with this clown. excuse me, this person. >> let me just say -- >> mr. president, your campaign agreed that both sides would get two-minute answers uninterrupted.

will, your side agreed to it, and why don't you observe what your campaign agreed to as a ground rule, okay, okay sir? >> he never keeps his word. >> that was a rhetorical question. >> was it a rhetorical question? well, over the next 90 minutes we're going to bring you special coverage that actually looks to push beyond the loudest clashes of the debate. perhaps if we're any good at it a journalistic antidote to the sound fury and trump interruption and overtalking. a lot of people pay attention. all that's up ahead. we begin now with insights from our "a" list gifts, jason johnson, aisha mills and steve schmidt. jason johnson, i ask you, what was that? >> in the immortal ways of lil

wayne, what the blank, yo. it was a mess. it was an absolute mess. and i -- i cannot impress upon people enough to understand, if you haven't been listening for the last four or five months. i've said it. others have said it. donald trump is not running for president. he is just trying to consolidate power. joe biden is trying to one for president. chris wallace is basically re-enacting a floor mat. any time you have a sitting president of the united states basically call on a terrorist organization like the proud boys to go out and intimidate people at the polls, that should be the end of the debate. >> let's go into that. you say there shouldn't be any more debates. i can see people agreeing with you. americans may exercise their own

choice. they may not watch as many debates. and yet that was such an historic low point. i want to go to you, aisha, a president who has sown so much discord refusing to denounce white supremacy. >> i'm sorry, jason and then aisha. >> oh, i'm sorry. yeah, ari, it's not just that he refused, he basically told them, you know, be ready. get your guns cocked. on instagram the proud boys are putting out logos that say "stand back, stand by." the president has called upon them as they've done several types in the past to intimidate and disrupt the election. that is what makes it dangerous. by the third debate he'll say get your guns ready and shoot democrats. that's why there shouldn't be any more democrats. >> since we talked so much about

moderating. he didn't quite literally say that, but i take your point about the aisha, as jason points out, the was not stand down, this was stand by. >> exactly. and here's the thing. the president has told us who he is. he has shown us who he is. again, tonight, help has shown and told us that what he's trying to do is to stoke a race war in this country. this is not brand-new. donald trump has been doing this his entire contrary. he's been creating racial animus, perpetuating racial animus, advancing himself. the thing, though, that makes this so many apology is the guy have to tell us who he is. if it's not sharldville saying there are good people on both sides. literally the tape is going to play a billion times of him refusing to denounce white supremacy. he can't even utter the language out of his mouth to even say

white supremacist. the proud boys as if they're going to stand up with him and that's what they're doing. the thing about this, ari, all the discourse we're going to have for weeks after this is that this is not new. we've always remembered donald trump has shown us who he is. at what point is the american going public to believe in him? we've got just over 30 days to make really tough decisions in our lives. >> steve schmidt, as someone who has prepped for these high-profile debates, your view oust very deliberate way, as everyone saw, that donald trump broke the rules they'd agreed on and really tried to make himself the overarching theme. now, if you don't like donald trump or on the fence, it may not have had a reaction from him. on the other hand, you certainlied what would have been. joe biden and the moderator

discussing facts about the covid death rate or civil rights in america. steve? >> well, i think this debate was a debacle for donald trump, and i think it's the beginning of the end of the presidency. what you'll see in the next couple of days is movement by at least a couple of points, probably outside the gravel and start to slip and all of this go down. one thing you won't see tomorrow is any senator state out there talking about what a great job donald trump did tonight. so let's just talk what beyond a disgrace for us to articulate. it was a national humiliation. you saw a president who was unhinged, lying, sweaty, disheveled, angry, petulant, and

most importantly of all, completely incapable of making any type of argument about why i should have four more years. they appeared to be crazy for most of the debate. and so brady had some great moments on economy, on the military that trump called "suckers and losers". and the reality of 2016 is this. whom of ever that race was about was the person who was losing the campaign. and donald trump was losing that campaign for 98% of the race until the last week when james comby made it about hillary clinton. just enough that donald trump won by 78,000 votes. and one thing -- >> well, steve, let me jump in and then i'm going to give you the mic back. since we have been talk about moderator rules around here, i'll give you a chance to respond.

to be a little millennial about it, he was chasing that 2016 race. the undercounting of the number of support including the racials getting it tomorrow, i take your point, i imagine many objective people would agree with the look of what donald trump looked like and sounded like, and yet -- and yet is still this support network for him, as long as he can disrupt these debates so they don't become a further expose igs of his failure in office. >> what i will say that is that there is a mythology the polling was wrong. the polling was showed on that hillary clinton win, win the votes by 2.5%. she should have been in michigan. she should have in other states.

hillary clinton shouldn't have stopped their polling operation. all water under the bridge. here's the point and 2016 are different elections. everybody in the media is understating biden's strength right now and overstating trump's because no one wants to be wrong again. >> joe biden ha the biggest lead of any presidential candidate in the modern era. it's the biggest, the broadest, the most during lead that you've seen in the modern presidential era, and that is is going to get bigger not stronger after this debate. what we saw tonight was, no pun intended, the real donald trump? a's completely unhinge. you saw tonight the first american in four years to stand on a stage with this lying, blustering ma foon and try to

hold them to account. when you have somebody up there breaking the rules. has no -- this debate was about one thing in the end tonight. one thing that matters happened in this debate tonight. donald trump intimated and talented violence against this country. if he loses the election. make no mistake about it. it's exactly what he did exactly what he meant -- >> let me. >> and these proud boys are a white supremacist neo-nazi group. before, we got one hour -- >> right. >> -- after this debate they have a new shoulder patch for their camouflage outfits and call them to violence. >> let me bring in aisha -- those are very serious, important points. let me bring in aisha.

go ahead. if you think about the integrity of the entirety of the group would be only several ounces of i'll call it affection, right? he may not claim he's a racist but the racists think he is. every other line in it was just about donald trump and his bluster talking about how great he is. and then supposedly knowing of the what biden should or shouldn't do. he said a couple of times, you lost this couldn't do. this couldn't do that. if you had the chance, donald trump only empathized with, prapzed and appeased himself throughout. and i think this is really important because people, you know, morning back 29, related to so many folks. was the pop list candidate and reflected their values and people felt connected to him, he

now have had several years and donald trump that what people are tiring of and just exhausted by is thattual donald trump does and talk about himself and especially to her garden politics are personal and it's all about people. we don't have of that coming up right now is in since we're deep in this, i think we have the proud boys moment. many people batches this fortuned it but because you're putting him under warranted scout new. that's a good reason for that. are you willing tonight to condemn white supremacists and militia groups. >> sure and. >> and to say that they need to stand down and not add to the number of cities we've seen in kenosha and portland. >> i would say almost everything i see is from the left ring, not the right wing.

>> what are you seeing? >> i'm willing to do anything. say it. do it. you want to call him -- give me a name. >> white problem sift. >> the proud boys, stand back and dale devil, somebody's got to do something about antifa and the left. th that's the moment people can adjudicated it for themselves. my panel states. i want to get with the minute i have, just closing thought ayes first. donald trump has used them repeatedly -- there were republican has used them throughout our committee. upon them. this is not, in my mind, operation if isn't debate where the paces are.

you can accept or reject. that's your beauty school. believe us when she shows us jorge. >> yeah, these -- this isn't a big corn. this was a digitery do. i have a real problem with how he asked the question. white nationals in louisville. white nationals trying to indem dating and the president of the united states has consistently encouraged their behavior and encouraged them to become more aggressive and violent. >> yeah, i think it's deadly

serious in that regard. the three of you have spoken with moral clarity and this goes to why even i think after a night as chaotic as it was because donald trump wanted to make it so, it still is scrutiny. as steve said, the first time in years we've seen him up there with anyone. people can who can hold on a conversation that is fact based let alone the moral dimension. i'm excited there. we're going to fit in a quick break and our special coverage continues. a live bookkeeper is helping

customize quickbooks for me. okay, you're all set up. thanks! that was my business gi, this one's casual. get set up right with a live bookkeeper with intuit quickbooks.

that's the end of the segment. we're moving on. vice president -- >> can i be honest? it's a very important -- >> try to be honest. >> he stood up -- >> no. the answer to the question is no. i think the country would be better served if we allowed both people to speak with fewer interruptions. i'm appealing to you, sir, to do

that. >> well, him too. >> well, frankly, you've been doing more interrupting. >> mr. president, your campaign agreed that both sides would get two-minute answers uninterrupted. well, your side agreed to it and why don't you observe what your campaign agreed to as a ground rule, okay, sir? >> okay, sir? but it wasn't okay. the debate commission did agree to a long set of precise rules for tonight's debate and donald trump broke them constantly. with honestly very few consequences within the debate. fox news chris wallace drew lots of criticism for losing control and allowing trump to get away with so much. he was criticized during this debate in real time with social media and vociferously in the hours sense. wallace may have been in an extra tough spot because he works for a network very aligned with trump, fox news. other moderators may find this a vexing challenge in the scheduled debates ahead. donald trump's blatant breaking

of debate rules echos how he governs. defy anyone to drop you and tell your base being able to basically get away with it is proof that you're the dominant winner and everyone else, the debate commission, chris wallace, the media, joe biden, they're all ineffective complainers. back with me, jason johnson, aisha mills and steve schmidt. jason, first, is there a rebuttal to that argument that is messy as obviously negative as it looked with a fox news moderator of all moderators repeatedly having to rebuke donald trump. saying, well, when i get away with it as he flexed during the convention, hey, they told me i couldn't use the white house, but here we are. what's the rebuttal? >> the rebuttal to that is, it doesn't end up helping you with voters and that's ultimately what matters. if you think about it, heading into this debate, what was donald trump's team talking about. oh, joe biden, we need to

inspect his microphone. we need to have him take a drug test. we need to see who is the highest in the room. they wanted us discussing all of this nonsense beforehand. that doesn't make you look tough if you're complaining about the ground rules before you get in. when you actually scream and yell the whole time. i've paid a lot of attention to this. i looked at some of the online streaming about undecided voters or weak partisan voters one way or the other. that level of screaming and conflict only makes you look good to people who like you. people generally turned off from american politics, deciding do i want to bother to vote, donald trump didn't gain any voters tonight. so being hyperaggressive and looking like you've got hands and you're the toughest guy in the room. okay, great, that's going to keep you the people you already have, but that also inspires the people who liked joe biden because he seems more sane and the people who didn't know if they wanted to vote turned off. i don't think it's the smart long-term strategy, but it's the only thing that donald trump knows how to do.

>> very careful listeners will note that professor johnson started off the night with a lil wayne quote and slightly referenced travis scott, "highest in the room." the professor is in. a big night in american politics and he's ready. steve, would you speak to both your rating of both chris wallace, which is a question about tonight and whether donald trump, like a kind of a hacker who comes in and you say, well, we have a commission system here. we don't have any vulnerabilities. and he hacks his way into the files and shows you the holes in the system. does that, steve, in your view, raise questions about the upcoming debates, how they should be run, et cetera? >> well, i mean, i think that whether it was controllable -- whether it was controllable or not, i think is an open question, is a fair question. but chris wallace lost control of the debate three to four minutes in. he should have turned off his microphone. and any of the coming moderators who go into that debate as the

moderator without a kill switch on his microphone i think are certifiable. and the debate commission should insist on it. there should be a penalty for the flouting of the rules. and if trump doesn't want to agree to that then we don't have to have anymore debates because the country has seen enough. now, we are in a no-lose situation because i do believe the race is about trump. the debate was about trump. ergo, trump lost the debate and the debate helped trump on his way to losing the election. and so the more we see of trump's unhinged behavior, i think the more repellant it is to normal people in this country. and i think we get -- we get confused sometimes between a political problem and a psychological problem. the politics are pretty clear right now. there are more people in a substantial majority that are just opposed to this in this country. don't like it.

we have a sociological problem in that we have 30% of the country that's a member of a cult of personality and looks at trump's unhinged performance and says, wow, our sweaty, angry tyrant did a great job. he can do no wrong. so whether it's his tax avoidance and paying $750 a year or cheating on anything else that he's done all of his life, there's nothing you can say to these people that does anything to their loyalty towards him. and so we have a problem as a society when we have fully 30% of us in a cult of permit. personality. but politically there's not enough of them to continue ruling over the rest of this. and there will be less of them who are inclined to vote for him after his unhinged performance tonight. >> hmm. aisha? >> yeah. >> yes, i just want to pick up on who are the people he's trying to appeal to, and, frankly, who biden is trying to

appeal to. i've been quite the anywnaysaye. i've pooh-poohed the idea that there is a middle to be moved. we need to focus on rallying up our base and having them turn out. donald trump's base is smaller than the democratic base. if it's a battle of the bases, the democrats are going to win. the interesting thing about this. i was watching my twitter feed kind of fly off. there are people who gave trump a chance who said, you know, he is blinlt aelligerent and he's f a jerk, but in contrast to hillary clinton who they had a lot of bad things to say about, well, actually, maybe he's going to tough talk and do something different. we're okay with the tough talk. well, he has soiled those people. apt this point, you cannot make a justification for why you would want your child to go to school tomorrow and behave the way that donald trump did tonight. there are over 200,000 families in america who have lost loved ones to covid. a lot of these people are in red states.

a lot of these families voted for donald trump. >> sure. >> not one word of compassion around them. and i'm actually on the committee that is holding a remembrance on sunday, a national covid remembrance, so i'm really kind of in the thick of talking to families right now. it does not matter if they are red state, blue state, whatever, people are hurting, and the fact that you have a guy who you entrusted, who you said i'm going to try something different with you, i'm going to go ahead and, you know, vote for you because this might matter economically to my family. >> right. >> doesn't have any empathy at all. >> right. >> i think he is blowing people up right now with this. so hopefully it will pan out for democrats at the end of the day. >> really important points here from our special panel. aisha mills, jason johnson, steve schmidt. our post-debate coverage continues live. a bunch more special guests. the fact check, and results and reaction pouring in around the country when we come back in just three minutes.

i'm so happy. (brad) apartments-dot-com. the most popular place to find a place. i love awhatever question's chai have i feel likehe better. there's an avenue to seek the answer. hit that app and you start a story, you're on an adventure.

download a new book within seconds and it's ready to go. there's something for everybody on audible. i like short stories. short stories are easy. they're quick. i like long and like intricate stories, that's what i really love. audible originals. i like biographies. self-help. fantasy. true crime podcasts. i love it so much. i can literally listen to anything. i can do it any time. and any place. and you know, for as long as i like. getting really into a story can totally transform where you are and your mindset. it's really cool. every time i learn something new, it just fuels the curiosity to explore more, to learn more. there's anything and everything. for a limited time, prime members, save $50 on your first year of audible. text listen17 to 500500.

♪ it's 1:00 a.m. on the east coast. 10:00 p.m. on the west. i'm ari melber. continuing live coverage of the first presidential debate that did veer off into a rule-breaking rant by president trump. he ramped up attacks on biden's family, and even if trump caused chaos that is hard to watch, as we noted. the clash did reveal two different leaders with two very different approaches to