today on an e-mail exchange for team trump's advisers and associates that raises more questions about the trump campaign and whether or not they had advanced knowledge about e-mails stolen from the clinton campaign and later published by wikileaks. the new report raises those new questions about what the trump campaign knew about russian efforts to release those e-mails and damage hillary clinton's candidacy. these are the -- some of the same questions at the heart of special council robert mueller's investigation. mueller has charged more than two dozen russians for their efforts to interference in the 2016 election. many legal experts have positted the collusion investigation is probing whether there was a conspiracy that ties the trump campaign to that russian effort. the times report raises new questions about what trump campaign head steve bannon knew and when he knew it. it also describes how roger stone, a longtime ally and adviser to donald trump, quote, presented himself to trump campaign officials as a conduit of inside information from wikileaks. russia's chosen repository for documents hacked from democratic computers. the times describes an e-mail exchange between stone and bannon. mr. bannon's october 2016 e-mail correspondence shows the perception that mr. stone knew what wikileaks had in mind for mrs. clinton spreads to the highest levels of the trump campaign. no evidence has emerged that mr. trump or his advisers alerted the authorities. the report ads, mr. bannon and two other former senior campaign officials have detailed to prosecutors for the special counsel robert mueller how mr. stone created that impression according to people familiar with their accounts. one of them told investigators that mr. stone not only seemed to predict wikileaks actions but also that he took credit afterwards for the timing of its disclosures that damaged hillary clinton's candidacy. joining us from "the new york times," mike schmidt, one of the reporters who broke this story this afternoon. nick confessore, political reporter also from "the new york times." from "the washington post," white house reporter ashley parker and senior political reporter aaron blank, frank figliuzzi, former fbi assistant of counterterrorism and donny deutsch, karine jean-pierre and rick stengel, former under secretary of state for public diplomacy. mike schmidt, take us through what you guys are reporting and its significance in the broader sweep of the mueller investigation into this potential conspiracy between the russians and donald trump's associates. >> what we're trying to get at in this story is the question of stone. was stone simply representing himself as a person that was in touch with wikileaks to enhance his credibility, to give him relevancy within the campaign? was that why he claimed to have insight into what was going to happen? or did he truly know something? was he really in touch with wikileaks or julian assange? and that's at the heart of the investigation. that question. and senior campaign officials were sort of dubious of stone but they wanted to sort of -- they didn't want to alienate him because he was out doing a lot of work for the president, really trying to help them. but at the same time, they weren't sure what to make of it and that's what mueller is still trying to figure out. to answer the question, was stone truly talking to wikileaks. >> and what stone represented to the campaign was that he was. and it seems like from the e-mails that you guys report on today, that the trump campaign had the same response to more inside information from russia that don junior had to the meeting in trump tower. this teams like a second proof point that they were very interested and eager to receive aid from russia. >> it's interesting. bannon sort of does both of them. in one of the first e-mails that bannon ends he's basically got better things to do than talk to roger stone. but it's after assange goes public that bannon reaches out to stone to find out what he knows. to see if there's anything more there. stone had -- assange had just held a press conference and bannon was asking stone what he knew. and if there was anything more there. you know, look. stone was doing a lot of work for the president. a lot of stuff outside, really trying to help undermine clinton's campaign. and one of the e-mails even shows stone was asking bannon to have rebecca mercer send money to his outside group trying to show that bill clinton had an illegitimate child. so a lot going to there between stone and the campaign. >> and frank figliuzzi, donald trump seems to be doing a volume business of sleaziness and hoping he'll avoid the long arm of the law. if i can start reading through some of these e-mails for all of you and take me through what, as an investigator, these e-mails would mean. let me start with you, frank figliuzzi. for matt boyle who is at breitbart to roger stone. assange, what's he got? hope it's good. that's from matt boyle at breitbart. roger stone reports it is. i would tell bannon but he doesn't call me back. my book on the trump campaign will be out in june. many scores will be settled. frank? >> everyone that's a party to these e-mails asking what's he got. hope it's good and then bannon finally weighing in and saying what's this all about, that expands the scope, the universe of people who may be charged as conspirators, accomplices, having prior or advanced knowledge of what's going on. look, my theory on this is, walks like a duck quacks like a duck, it's probably a duck. the timing of these instances, the timing of the release of the trove of e-mails after we hear president trump on tape saying really disgufsting things. this saul tiis all timed perfec roger stone can't escape that timing. he can say it was all bragodocio but the timing of it is too sharp to be other than something deliberate and something knowledgeable. so the other thing that's got my attention here is we're hearing now that mueller's looking at witness tampering for roger stone, telling people don't cooperate. don't testify. so you've got kind of a myriad of things happening. and then let's not forget this. this is wikileaks. what does that mean? it means, as i've said many, many times that the fbi, the u.s. intelligence community, has more information than we're hearing. they cover wikileaks. wikileaks, there was great debate in washington, by the way, as to whether wikileaks was actually -- should actually be plead as a foreign power because of the damage they were doing in terms of leaking voluminous amounts of classified and secret -- top secret communications. what does that mean? it means our government is on them like a blanket. and so that means that mueller is privy to the other end of these conversations. he knows what's going on and when he finally sits people down and interviews them, it's either their choice to lie or tell the truth because he's got the answer. >> nick confessore, it's a great point, and i know you're all in on some of this forensic investigative reporting when bob mueller writes an indictment over the summer for some of these russians he had keystroke evidence. it means exactly what frank figliuzzi just explained. robert mueller knows everything that transpired, and he has a long history as someone who knows how to bust cybercrimes going all the way back to his years as a u.s. attorney in northern california. the heart of silicon valley. so talk about these -- the indictments of the russians. talk about -- i think people lose sight there's so much public facing information on the obstruction investigation. but the questions about a conspiracy with russia do get deep into the weeds of what robert mueller has been able to deduce and what he's been able to investigate on that cybercrime front. >> well, look, we now have a lot of paper, nicolle, on the fact there was an incredible campaign from the russian side to influence the election, to hack e-mails, to spread content disinformation. and on the intelligence side, to find puppets and dupes in the trump campaign. they were constantly driving by this campaign trying to find some way in with officials. they tried almost everybody it seems. so there's a lot of paper on this. we have something uniquely trump can that's hard for mueller. the president and people around him and around his campaign, there were a lot of people who, like the president, bragged a lot about their abilities. talked up their own game in their own book. said they could do a lot of things they couldn't necessarily do. and roger stone is a great example of this. this man takes pleasure as a trickster. claimed credit for the brooks brothers riot, claimed credit for taking down eliot spitzer, the governor of new york and now at a certain point in the campaign, he's taken credit as being the go-to guy for wikileaks. and the question is do you believe him? was he exaggerating at the time or is he lying now? >> mike schmidt, it's a great point about roger stone. you can almost hear donald trump's -- if roger stone is to be indicted as a lot of people suspect he may be, you can almost hear the white house response, well, he was hardly involved. we hardly knew him. but you've reported that mueller has questions for the president about wikileaks. one of the questions that mueller has as they've shared with his lawyers is for the president, what did you know about communications between roger stone, his associates, julian asank sange or wikileaks. this goes straight to their questions about what the president knew about this effort, this russian effort to help the trump campaign. >> that's the big question that hangs over this that we don't have an answer to. what did the president know about this? did he have any advanced knowledge from stone, from anyone nels the campaign about what was to come? and there's these major questions that still hang over the investigation. that being one of them that, you know, mueller is still looking at. how much information was trickling back? where was it trickling? if bannon was talking to stone,s but he passing it on to the president? i don't think there's any evidence of that but was stone still talking to the president. the president continues to talk to a wide range of people while he was candidate, certainly while he's been president. that's what mueller is putting a lot of time and effort into. he doesn't want to close his investigation without having turned over every stone to figure out -- no pun intended -- to figure out whether there was -- where that information was flowing. how much was going from wikileaks to stone to the campaign. >> aaron blake, no one that covers politics will forget where they were when donald trump said, russia, if you're listening, i hope you're able to find hillary clinton's e-mails. we pretend there aren't public facing evidence. the president claims he's innocent on a lot of these questions because the campaign was too incompetent to be this strategic. but these are a whole lot of coincidences that we have to buy. >> yeah, and i think what's interesting about this reporting, as much as it fills out the picture of a roger stone who was pretending at least to have contacts with wikileaks and trying to get the campaign interested in those is this is another example of his story changing. he told "the washington post" earlier this week that he didn't talk to trump campaign officials about wikileaks during the campaign. now we find out that he was actually e-mailing with steve bannon about these things a couple days before the actual wikileaks e-mails came out about hillary clinton. this is the latest in a series of examples of roger stone saying things that later turn out to fall apart. one of them has to do with his contacts with wikileaks. he didn't have direct contact. turned out he was direct messaging with them. he didn't have contacts with any russians about the campaign. turned out he talked to a man who identified himself as henry greenberg who was identifiably russian and had been identified to him as a russian. so we're kind of finding this kind of drip, drip, drip of things that contradict what roger stone has said to us in the past. and, of course, this isn't the first time we've seen these denials fall apart. but the question is, why were the denials false? why did he say these things now being contradicted? was he covering something up or just being this guy who is exusing confidence about exactly what happened and was really just pumping himself up as this guy who was significant and really close to wikileaks through this whole thing. >> ashley parker, such a commentary on the trump raerks that we have to get to the bottom of whether something is puffery or what was at the bottom of it. let me ask you about steve bannon. your colleagues reported that steve bannon had been back in to talk to robert mueller and mike's reporting today, the tie and the e-mails and the contacts now with roger stone. talk about how steve bannon has been overlooked as one of the potential key figures in tying wikileaks and roger stone and the dirty tricks he was engaged in to the heart of the trump campaign. he was running the trump campaign at the time that donald trump said russia, if you're listening. how about looking for those missing e-mails? steve bannon is often overlooked because he's done so much filling in of the narrative and fire and fury and other places of people's culpability he talked about weisman and the money laundering guys going through manafort and jared and we haven't spent time talking about what may be legal exposure for steve bannon himself. >> steve bannon was a key figure during a key and critical time of the trump campaign, not just the role he played in the campaign but also his connections to top donors like the mercers who he mentioned. his connections to the breitbart website which was a place he used to get out of a lot of information. and what bannon's involvement shows and roger stone's is that while the white house and trump allies like to dismiss some of the people so far caught up in mueller's investigation as a little periphery or even if they did something wrong, the president had absolutely no idea, steve bannon is absolutely a top person who was clearly interested in this topic that's worth noting when he thought roger stone and he was trying to figure out what mueller is trying to figure out now. is this puffery or a conduit to wikileaks and assange and russia. >> he wasn't racing to call the authorities or the fbi but reaching out to roger stone. so you have roger stone who is not that peripheral either. on the one hand on the fringe. talking to steve bannon. helped install manafort. kept for close periods in close contact. this brings it closer to the person at the top and to the top level of the campaign. >> mike schmidt, do you have any indication that steve bannon or roger stone have tripped themselves up legally in any of this process? are they under any additional scrutiny or renewed scrutiny from any of the committees to which they testified before? because these all seem like new revelations and things we've never seen or heard before. >> yeah, in terms of if bannon has criminal exposure, we have no indication he's under investigation for this. he's a witness that's gone in, has cooperated extensively with mueller. appears to have told mueller about a wide range of things spending many hours with him. no indication he's a target. obviously, mueller spending a lot of time looking at stone and part of stone's problems that some people believe is his testimony to congress. stone last year going up to the hill, testifying about, you know, a wide range of issues that went on during the campaign, his contacts. and does he have, you know, does that testimony line up with what mueller has found about and truly what his contacts work? and that is among many different things, whether it's his outside groups he was raising money for, whether it's his contacts with assange that mueller is spending all this time on. it seems like whenever we get an answer on that, we'll have a clearer picture on these major questions of collusion. >> i think it brings into focus rick stengel the vast ngs of the mueller probe. the professional ump of the mueller probe and durability of mueller's fact-finding mission. he's sent cases out to the southern district of new york. but as mike schmidt just detailed, the mueller investigation is going to answer a lot of questions. among them, whether or not people like roger stone and steve bannon and others i would assume, maybe don jr., maybe jerod, lied when they went before congress. we are still, almost a year and a half into this, getting new pieces of information about what they said and when they said it. >> yes, yes and yes. but i'm going to pour a little water on this because i hope the special counsel his bigger fish to fry than roger stone. roger stone is a sleazy member of the underside of american politics. he's been trying to fasten himself to republican candidates since abraham lincoln. the fact he could get a little bit of traction with a guy like donald trump. he's about the only guy that makes donald trump look like george washington in the whole world. and so he's not -- as mike said and others, i looked at the bannon's e-mail. it was, get away from me, kid. you're bothering me. >> if bannon doesn't write back. we don't know if he picked up the phone. >> i'm pouring water on your whole segment. >> i take your water. you and mike schmidt can work this out after the show. frank, i want you to weigh in because this didn't feel like a roger stone story. this seemed like a story perhaps knitting together the conspiracy between the russian effort and the trump campaign. >> that's exactly what i'm focused on is this is fascinating. the nexus between the russian government and wikileaks, right? and so who was at the center of this? is it wikileaks willingly being used by russian intelligence services? is it the russian intelligence service calling the shots? and if so, who in the campaign is in touch with the russians? because, remember, roger stone keeps saying i passed a polygraph. i passed a polygraph. he gave himself a polygraph. you can pass any polygraph -- you can pass any polygraph you fpt you shape the questions directly. so if the question was -- >> i couldn't. i have such a guilty conscience. i don't think i could even pass my own polygraph, but i take your point. >> as we've just heard, this is roger stone. so he can shape the questions on the polygraph. he can have the examiner say, have you ever been in touch with wikileaks? answer, no. telling the truth. why? because credico was in touch. have you been in touch with russian operatives who are using wikileaks as the conduit to release what they've hacked? that's the question. that's what mueller is looking at. >> michael schmidt, you want the last word since rick stengel poured water on the big scoop? >> mike schmidt, nick confessore, frank figliuzzi, thank you all. fact-checking the president a day after telling abc news that he tries to tell the truth and confessing to axios that he calls the press the enemy of the people for political effect. we've decided to fact-expecheck presidents remarks today before we air them. and oprah's closing message. a passionate plea to get out the vote. she barnstorms georgia and provides a message in contrast to that of fear and division. we'll show that to you coming up. neutrogena® rapid wrinkle repair works in just one week. with the fastest retinol formula to visibly reduce wrinkles. neutrogena®. you may be learning about, medicare and supplemental insurance. medicare is great, but it doesn't cover everything ...only about 80% of your part b medicare costs. a medicare supplement insurance plan may help cover some of the rest. learn how an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company might be the right choice for you. a free decision guide is a great place to start. call today to request yours. so what makes an aarp medicare supplement plan unique? these are the only medicare supplement plans endorsed by aarp because they meet aarp's high standards of quality and service. you're also getting the great features that any medicare supplement plan provides. you may choose any doctor that accepts medicare patients. you can even visit a specialist. with this type of plan there are no networks or referrals needed. also, a medicare supplement plan... ...goes with you when you travel anywhere in the u.s. call today for a free guide. with lower expense ratios than comparable vanguard funds. and we're now offering zero expense ratio index funds. that's value you'll only find at fidelity. ♪ one thing leads another donald trump is making remarks in the roosevelt room this hour. five days before the midterm elections and a day after admitting to abc news that he tells the truth only when he can. today's remarks come after weeks of engaging in a deliberate strategy of stoking fear about the humanitarian crisis in central america. a slow-moving caravan of asylum seekers and migrants. they also come after -- come days after a war of words with house speaker paul ryan about birthright citizenship. donald trump's divisive speech has been cited as contributing to the climate in which the synagogue shooter targeted jewish americans and the pipe bomber targeted trump's critics. because he's used immigration in blatantly political ways and in an abundance of caution, we've decided to monitor those remarks, fact-check them against his rhetoric and record on immigration and bring you the important news from them. donald trump confessed to axios that one of the most strident attack lines that the press is the enemy of the people is an act. >> to be honest, what scares the crap out of me is if you're saying enemy of the people, enemy of the people. >> you're right. >> but god forbid that like somebody, you've got federal reservent supporters. they love you and -- >> they like me more because of that. >> they like you more but what happens if someone gets shot. someone shoots one of these reporters? but honestly -- i don't think you think we're the enemy of the people, do you? >> i don't. but if you gave me false reports i'd say that's not a good thing for our country. >> don't you worry at all? you're the most powerful man in the world. if you say that word enemy, enemy, tens of thousands of people go into a stadium to listen to you and people go on social media and get themselves so jazzed up. i'm scared someone is going to take it too far. >> it's my only form of fighting back. i couldn't be here if i did that. >> you won. you have the presidency. >> but i did this before i won. >> unbelievable. aaron blake still with us. donny and karine. >> it was a great interview. >> it really was. >> look, we're going to show these ads. but all you need to see, that man. that was one of the most honest trumps you ever saw there because he was basically -- his explanation is almost -- psychotic explanation was, well, yeah, i'm not even thinking about if it affects people. so that was almost the scariest part. >> they like me more because of it. that's his standard for everything. not telling hard truths. >> whatever it takes. by the way, if it meant killing 100 people and it worked, i'd kill 100 people. why wouldn't i? >> what seemed to be laid bare is his fear. he's so afraid of not being seen as strong that he can't drop the brutal attack. i thought he looked so small and so scared. >> he looked really -- they did an amazing job. he looked really like a child. like a man-child sitting there. but it really goes back to, that's why he loves dictators and wants to be a dictator because strength is really important to him. but i do believe that trump -- trump lies about his lies. you know, he opens his mouth and you -- you could basically assume that every time he opens his mouth he is lying. the problem is they are real-life, worldwide consequences when he does that. this is the president of the united states. >> and targeting immigrants is perhaps among the most cynical buckets of his lies. let's watch, speaking of cynical, one of the most cynical ads of the cycle. this is from the president. >> that was on the president's twitter feed today. to show you the contrast between the democrats' closing message, here's oprah. >> as our civil rights predecessors used to say, we shall not be moved. so every single one of us has the same power at the polls. we have the ability to go into a tiny booth or in my neighborhood, it's not even a booth. just a little stand. and every one of us, regardless of the color of our skin, it doesn't matter. when you're there at the polls. where the god we pray to, it doesn't matter. who we choose to love, whether or not we graduated high school or went to college or how much money you have in the bank or whether or not you have a pre-existing condition, or whether you're elderly or whether you're not. whether you're developmentally disabled. doesn't matter at the polls. we are all equal in power. >> it seems to boil down to, i'm going to tell you what to be afraid of and who is to blame and oprah winfrey there, empowerment. classic oprah. >> that's the -- go ahead. i'm sorry. >> that was the best of america and the worst of america. you saw. and trump was tripling -- that was worst than willie horton. >> still pinned at the top of his twitter feed. >> the willie horton ad was an anonymous ad put out. the most vile, despicable. you have a lot of republicans speaking out about it. why this is going to backfire on trump. there was a huge blue wave because there are the better angels in us. and there are, beyond the obvious anti-trumpers, there are a lot of republicans -- a lot of people who voted for trump who still don't mind him in office but want to put guardrald. not only do you want trump in or want trump out. do you want him unbridled or with guard rails around him. a lot of republicans are going to stay home and closet republicans, closet people who wouldn't admit voting for trump are going to not vote for the -- the better angels are coming up. other than the 35% craze, the people you see at the rallies. i've spoken to a bunch of republicans who have said i'm not voting or i'm voting democrat. you see it. we have a primal instinct. a marist poll came out that 80% of people think the political discourt is going to cause more violence. 80%. we've seen it in the last week. that's a primal fear. >> let's talk about that willie horton ad and what trump did. i'll go to the better angels afterwards. so what that trump ad did which he promoted and sent from his twitter feed made the willie horton ad look subtle. i covered the bush campaign in 1988. the bush campaign moved themselves away from it they were so embarrassed by it. remember who made that ad. roger ales. willie horton, roger ales, fox news. donald trump. that is the genesis of it. >> aaron, you've written about all these -- what do they call it, centrifugal circles. >> i think the difference sheer that this is something that the president is attaching his name to. as the other guests have mentioned, the horton ad was something people distanced themselves from. the bush campaign spent 25 days, i think it was, basically trying to play this off, not denouncing it but not accepting it. they waited until it was almost done. the other aspect that is really important is, the immigration rhetoric from the president. there's this narrative out there that while it's ugly and it's gear based and it may not be pretty that it's going to tee up republicans to go vote. that it is going to work. so maybe it's not pretty but it actually works. i think we're going to find out in this election more so than a lot of other elections whether those fear-based attacks can actually kind of thwart a really bad environment because that's really kind of polar opposite to what the democrats' message is right now. i don't think that looking at polling we have a good idea about how exactly the immigration message is going to play because in a lot of these districts, a lot of independents are very much against the president's immigration policies from the border wall to birthright citizenship. even more generally, "the washington post" had a poll that showed people preferred democrats 48% to 42%. so this is a situation in which the passion is probably on the republican side. they want to get voters out there. but if independents decide the republicans are simply going too far, if they decide that ads like this are just outside the mainstream and not acceptable, we could see something of a >>e put together for the dnc. democrats are closing on issues, republicans on fear. we'll know who has got the stronger hand next tuesday. >> i had lost my medicine. i don't know what i would ever do. that would lead me to death and i don't understand why people would think to do that. >> when i see them on tv taking kids away from their parents, it's scary. >> i heard if you zigzag when you run, like the shooter's less likely to shoot you. i've been thinking if a shooter ever comes into a classroom i'd run through the backdoor and zigzag out of the school. so i think about that on a daily basis. >> i can't vote. >> i can't vote. >> so vote for me. >> vote for me. >> for me. >> for me. >> so vote for me. >> oh, my god. donny, that's unbelievable. >> amazing team put that together. kirschburg was behind that. we see thousands of ads that go pre-existing conditions. and then you see there are humans, it's kids. and we won't always do things for ourselves but we'll throw ourselves in front of a car for our kids. >> especially during the health care battole t olbattle on the came out and talked about what they were going through. their parents talked on behalf of them, obviously. i want to say something about the immigration, the fear mongering. we have an example of just last year in virginia. you had ed gillespie who ran these ugly ms-13 anti-immigration ads. and it backfired. he -- ralph northam overperformed. he got 9 points in that election where the year before hillary clinton got five points. and they won. they got gained in democratic states in the state legislature. so that was his closing message. and it didn't work. so i'd like to think -- and that was a wave election in virginia. i'd like to think that's a microcosm of what we might see. >> canary in the mine perhaps. when we come back, more from oprah who hits the campaign trail and fires up the live audience for stacey abrams. will the oprah effect stretch beyond georgia? tronic dance mus♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ with my bladder leakage, the products i've tried just didn't fit right. they were too loose. it's getting in the way of our camping trips. but with a range of sizes, depend fit-flex is made for me. with a range of sizes for all body types, depend fit-flex underwear is guaranteed to be your best fit. big corporations are making and just got a huge tax break. but the middle class is struggling. prop c is a common-sense plan. the top 1% of businesses pay their fair share to tackle homelessness for all of us. companies with revenue greater than $50 million pay, not small businesses or homeowners. the prop c plan is supported by the democratic party, nancy pelosi & dianne feinstein vote "yes" on c. big corporations pay for it, not you. until you see her like she was today, you might have forgotten how powerful, just how persuasive oprah winfrey really is. today in georgia, we got a reminder. the oprah effect happening right in front of us as the tv superstar knocked on doors stumping for stacey abrams, the democrat running for governor there. listen to what oprah told the crowd at a campaign event this afternoon and judge for yourself the potential impact this rare, k coveted endorsement will have. >> you all are on the precipice, on the very precipice of an historical and historical election. nobody paid for me to come here. nobody even asked me to come here. i paid for myself, and i approve this message. so i'm here today because stacey abrams cares about the things that matter. >> stacey abrams did this right. >> yes. >> democrats have struggled with how to deploy celebrities. and oprah isn't there in a fancy, you know, get up, doing a concert. she is speaking from the heart to the crowd. and you can see her connecting. >> yeah. >> i agree with you 100%. they are in marietta, georgia, outside of atlanta, in the suburbs of atlanta, where it's, i think, trying to remember, 50% white? 30% african-american. 20% latinos. and it is -- it is her coalition. this is the group that's supposed to come out for stacey abrams. it's really brilliant. >> it's also the obama coalition. >> and it reminds me of 2017 when oprah endorsed obama and did that awesome event for obama in south carolina, columbia, south carolina, with 30,000 people showing up. it made a difference. he won south carolina by 20 points more than hillary clinton did. of course, he won iowa and then lost in new hampshire. but it is -- it just shows how unmatched oprah is. >> she's not a celebrity. the difference is -- >> she's unmatched. >> you go oh, it's hollywood. she's a woman who was sexually abused who has just grown up with the american women over the last 30 or 40 years. >> all women. >> muhammad ali, there are several people that are not just celebrities. they're icons. they stand in a different place perch other celebrity, stay home. i really mean that. i don't mean that glibly. she's in a different space and, man, if you can't be moved by her -- >> the person that -- >> the thing she did which you don't have is she is talking to people that she said think about the people who bled for you, who died for you. >> i want to play that. i'm going to play that. do we have that? >> the most powerful thing. >> around my mid-20s, around my mid-20s, i had the privilege of hearing reverend otis moss jr. who is a preacher. you all know him? preacher. preacher in cleveland, ohio. and i heard him tell the story of his father. of otis moss sr. who, right here in georgia's true county got up in the morning and put on his only suit and his best tie. and he walked six miles to the voting poll location he was told to go to in la grange. and when he got there after walking six miles in his good suit and tie, they said, boy, you at the wrong place. you at the wrong place. you need to go over to mountville. so he walked another six miles to mountville and when he got there, they said, boy, you at the wrong place. you need to go to the rosemont school. and i picture him walking from dawn to dusk in his suit, his feet tired, getting to the rosemont school and they say, boy, you too late. the polls are closed. and he never had a chance to vote. by the time the next election came around, he had died. so when i go to the polls and i cast my ballot, i cast it for a man i never knew. i cast it for otis moss sr. who walked 18 miles one day just for the chance to vote. >> that's what you were getting at? >> but it's also, she also talked about, remember you're voting for the little girls who sat at the lunch counter in mississippi. the people who were on the bus. you're voting for the people who marched across the edmond petes bridge. she's putting a little guilt on them for that. they suffered and died forev th. you can even vote by mail early on. people do need to take advantage of the franchise which people died for to give them. >> let me get you to go somewhere you don't often go here. she's also speaking to our emotions. to our guilt as a country for letting it get to this point, isn't she? i hear that as a mother of a son who wants a better world and oprah inspires me the same way she did with her tv show and book selections. oprah's brand is about tapping into our emotions and making us want to do better and be better. >> part of the emotion, ands they may not be a nice thing to say is the fear of donald trump and everything he represents. he represents everything opposite of what she was talking about today. all of those virtues that i think make us american. that people suffered for to do those things. that's what people are afraid of. >> one of your earlier guests said the passion sothe republican side. it's not. i'm hearing it from voters. people talking. that they need to get out and defend the country. this is about defending who we are at this point. this is not about the other guys are like, don't let the immigrants in. the people on this side are like, we have to defend who we are. >> we're going to keep going. oprah started talking at a second event. a lot of the same points she had. she's in decatur, georgia, still stumping for stacey abrams. i want to bring this back to stacey abrams because that's what oprah keeps doing. i want to defend celebrities. i think there's a way for other celebrities to go to the state. leave the cameras. knock on the doors. but you can go door to door. i think the -- there's never been -- >> i was a pre-celebrity republican. but there is something for people to do, to change the behavior. you are right. voting, we talk about voting. voting is a behavior that is easier than going to the gym and fewer people do it. >> that's exactly right. she's a great storyteller. you heard the people reacting. they were like, wow, oh. and she was -- and that's what she does. she reaches for the heart and she tells that story. and we have to remember what's happening right now. this is get out the vote. and that's the stark difference between what donald trump is doing, which is fear mongering and what democrats are doing which is exciting the base, reminding them what is at stake and you must go and vote. >> can we talk about the importance of black women in the time of trump? they're the only demographic that never fell for trump. i mean, white single women, i think, voted for trump in higher numbers than all black women. black women had trump's number. black women are the ones that are going to dig us out of the hole trump put us in. >> they sniffed out the bs, right? they were like, oh, no. we know exactly who this guy is. we have seen it. we have -- and not to laugh about this, but during 2015 and 2016, trump showed a lot of women, especially black women who have been around for a long time and was there for the civil rights movement. and they saw him and they were like, this sguy is too familiar. i remember this guy when i was marching or when dr. king was fighting for civil rights. oh, no, this is too scary. i don't want to go back. and they came out and they voted. >> i think black women also, and i worked on "the view" with whoopee goldberg. she was the first person i ever heard say, he's going to be your next president, folks. she also knew something about white voters. that they'd respond. in 2015, he was talking about not letting people fighting ebola back into the country. xenophobia, the ebola chapter. one of the most urnnderreported and underremembered chapters of donald trump's xenophobia and his fear and hostility to the good works that people do when they leave this country. but she also predicted how white americans would respond to him. >> i felt this. we all know make america great again. make america white again. there were a lot of americans, a lot of people i knew that would talk about obama in a, yeah, well, you know, i just think once obama got elected president, once he was in charge it was very different than a guy running for president. and i think there's a bigger racist part of this country. we're seeing it, living it. that's what donald trump is betting this election on. there were a lot of unhappy people. well, obama sucked as a president. well, why? and what they mean is he was black and i don't think we were ready for a black president and this is people i know and it's frightening. >> even obama said recently, maybe i was ten years too early. let's hope not. >> i don't think so, but -- >> all those things are on the ballot. when we come back, we'll break down what the president is saying at the white house. is he using the rose velts room to stoke more fear ahead of tuesday's election? welcome to the place where people go to learn about their medicare options before they're on medicare. come on in. you're turning 65 soon? yep. and you're retiring at 67? that's the plan! it's also a great time to learn about an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. here's why...medicare part b doesn't pay for everything. this part is up to you. a medicare supplement plan helps pay for some of what medicare doesn't. call unitedhealthcare insurance company or go online for your free decision guide about the only medicare supplement plans endorsed by aarp. selected for meeting their high standards of quality and service. this type of plan lets you say "yes" to any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients. do you accept medicare patients? i sure do! to learn more call or go online today for your free decision guide. oh, and happy birthday... or retirement... in advance. today, five days before election day, president trump used the office of the presidency to further the fear campaign that has come to define his political strategy. we chose not to air that speech live and instead to vet it for you. we listened to those remarks which offered no new policy specifics. here's a clip that's fit to air. >> we know a lot of where they are, who they are, and those people will be deported. directly deported. the biggest loophole drawing illegal aliens to our borders is the use of fraudulent or meritless asylum claims to gain entry into our great country. an alien simply crosses the border illegally, finds a border patrol agent, and using well coached language by lawyers and others that stand there and try to get fees or whatever they can get, they are given a phrase to read. they never heard of the phrase before. they don't believe in the phrase. but they're given a little legal statement to read. and they read it. and now all of a sudden they're supposed to qualify, but that's n not the reason they're here. this merely asserts the need for asylum, and then often released into the united states and they await a lengthy court process. the court process will take years sometimes. >> nbc's hans nichols joins the conversation from the white house. i worked at the white house for six years. i went to meetings on everything from the bird flu to hurricane katrina recovery to how to welcome a sports team. i never went to a meeting about an asylum seeker scandal abuse problem. is this real? >> it is real. i think what we just heard from the president of the united states is ftrying to change the points of entry on asylum speakers. i have to tell you, we appear to have an entirely new policy from the president of the united states. he appears to authorize the united states military, which he is dispatching to the southern border, to fire on that caravan. now, he couched his language, but what he said is that if they caravan is throwing stones or rocks, those will be considered firearms. high was later asked to follow up. he said he would consider that a rifle. now, just because the president is authorizing his military to fire on that caravan doesn't mean that they will. i have to tell you, there's been a lot of back and forth, and frankly confusion between the pentagon, north com, which is running this mission, this operation, and the white house, because in so many cases the president's rhetoric is further out in front than what officials are telling us at the pentagon. let me give you a quick example. the president just said that he already has a lot of troops down there, that they are building tents for asylum seekers to hold them there. officials at the pentagon have consistently told us that the only authorization they have is to build tents for u.s. border patrol agents. so it's hard to tell what's real here. and what's presidential rhetoric, but i think we heard the president authorize u.s. forces on the border to use lethal force against asylum seekers. and nicolle, that is no small thing. >> let's remind ourselves they're two months away from the border and he's talking about 15,000 troops. the military is not a toy, and jim mattis needs to stand up. just like the last caravan, 20 or 30 arrests, but these women, these children, fleeing, fleeing the worst of situations, are two months away. and he's going to take the lives of military men, who have families, treat them like toys, like the little green soldiers we grew up playing with, and send them down to fire on approach. this is insanity. >> at people throwing rocks. eric blake, if you could jump in here, what i heard hans nichols record is truey extraordinary. i have to believe, if john mccain were still alive and still a member of the senate armed services committee, secretary mattis would be on capitol hill tomorrow answering questions about how the commander in chief plans to deploy u.s. troops to shoot on unarmed asylum seekers or migrants armed with rocks. >> yeah, and by the way, those troops don't generally have the authorization to actually act as in the military on the border given it's in u.s. territory and this is not an advancing army. they actually don't have any authorities generally speaking that go beyond what we normally expect from the national guard, which of course, has been deployed to the border before. the president, of course, is very fond of talking about how he's actually sent what he calls the military there, which is apparently beyond national guard. he thinks that's a much more significant thing. look, this is him ratcheting up the rhetoric and doing it rather quickly. yesterday, it was the 15,000 troops. then it was the tweet with the ad that was very willy horton-esque. now it's this. he knows what he's doing. he's building this up. he's trying to keep this in the news. but the situation that he describes is nothing like what the data bear out as far as the number of illegal immigrants coming to this country. there is not a huge problem with these caravans trying to immigrate illegally. he seems to be accusing them, in fact, of all not actually being asylum seekers which i thought was a really interesting portion of that comment. so i would not expect this to get ramped down before it gets ramped up. but clearly, this is something that he wants us all to be focused on right now. >> hans nichols, any sense from folks or sources close to secretary mattis that there's any growing discomfort with constantly being used as a prop from the military parade, donald trump goes to paris, likes the french parade, orders one up, and the military has to spend some time and money planning a parade. donald trump wants a space force. secretary mattis, a serious man, known as a monk, not a mad dog, the way donald trump talks about him, has to spend serious time doing unserious things. now he has to send i think more troops to the southern border than are currently in afghanistan. and these changing definitions. that's where he's orwellian, changing the definition of a firearm from a firearm to a stone. >> so we haven't detected any frustration from mattis on this particular mission set. most recently, just yesterday, he said we don't do stunlts, when he was asked about what the u.s. military is doing down on the border. however, i have to say that the mission appears to be changing. we don't do stunts line from mattis had to do with troops going down there in a supporting role for the border protection, building re-enforcing structures, having some military police down there, having some medical personnel, some airlift. the mission that president trump is talking about is fundamentally different from the mission that we have been briefed on and that the pentagon has publicly defended. now, i will say that on some other issues you have detected frustration inside the pentagon. a, on just the way these orders are communicated. they're communicated by tweet. it's the president saying something at a campaign rally. and there you do see an effort by some officials to almost slow walk some of the president's intentions or what he says actually he wants to do, until the president gets frustrated and sends out a tweet, for example, on transgender. i have to say, though, on sending military troops to the border, again, we're talking about 7,000 even north. officials have cautioned that the number can go higher. but on that particular mission, there's not been a lot of pushback, and secretary mattis is on record as of just 28 hours ago saying the united states military does not do stunts. i think it's incumbent upon all of us who cover the pentagon on a daily basis to ask mattis if that's changed given what we just heard from the president, which is authorizing u.s. troops to fire upon convoys that as he says, they're coming to seek asylum. nicolle. >> donald trump just yesterday, not coincidentally, talked about his difficult relationship with the truth. mattis may want to watch this. >> i try. i do try. i think you try, too. you say things about me that are not necessarily correct. i do try. and i always want to tell the truth when i can i tell the truth. sometimes it turns out to be where something happens that's different or there's a change, but i always like to be truthful. >> i always like that. >> speaking of untruthfulness, he's misusing his role as commander in chief by bringing troops down. >> and misusing the roosevelt room. >> and other thing people should know, we accept a tiny number of asylum seekers relative to our size of country. canadians accept more both in terms of real numbers and as a percentage of their population than we do. >> he's creating a war like they did in the movie with dustin hoffman. >> this is the man, the president who has the security codes to our nuclear weapons, and it's scary. >> we're not going to let him use those. >> time well tell. my thanks to hans nichols for jumping on the air with us, aaron blake, karine jean-pierre, and rick stangal. >> i try to tell the truth when i can. i mean -- >> try to go to the gym, i try to eat salad. that's things you say about things you try and don't do. when my schedule permitted. >> dressing on the side, when i can. thank you, nicolle. if it's thursday, is the president's closing message opening the door for the democrats?

Related Keywords

New York , United States , Georgia , New Hampshire , Paris , France General , France , Washington , Atlanta , Cleveland , Ohio , Whitehouse , District Of Columbia , California , Virginia , Russia , Canada , Decatur , South Carolina , Iowa , Hollywood , Americans , America , Canadians , Russian , Russians , American , Ashley Parker , Mike Schmidt , Eric Blake , Otis Moss Jr , Wikileaks , Don Jr , Robert Mueller , Aaron Blake , Bob Pisani , Foxnews Donald , Stacey Abrams , Oprah Winfrey , Abraham Lincoln , Rebecca Mercer , Hans Nichols , Matt Boyle , Nancy Pelosi Dianne , Karine Jean Pierre , Eliot Spitzer , Steve Bannon , Willie Horton , Hillary Clinton , Nicolle Donald , Michael Schmidt , Paul Ryan , Muhammad Ali ,