Skip navigation

'Up with Steve Kornacki' for Saturday, August 8th, 2015

Read the transcript to the Saturday show

Date: August 8, 2015
Guest: Kathleen Sebelius, Michael Steele, Jonathan Allen, Erika Andiola,
Arthur Brooks, Omarosa Manigault


JONATHAN CAPEHART, MSNBC HOST: Is there blood in the water for Donald

Good morning. Thanks for getting UP with us. I`m Jonathan Capehart in for
Steve Kornacki. A new morning and again new comments from Donald Trump
that are drawing a lot of attention. A conservative forum has taken back
its invitation to billionaire businessman. Details on that in a minute.
Carly Fiorina seems to be having a moment since her debate performance this
week. We`ll assess what`s next for her.

Plus, President Obama begin a seventeen day trip to Martha`s Vineyard,
likely a working vacation with much lobbying still needed for the Iran
nuclear deal.

And stepping away from the world of politics. A life sentence for Aurora
Movie Theater gunman James Holmes. Juror reaction live from Colorado. But
we begin this morning with Donald Trump versus FOX News. A feud that`s
taken a dramatic turn overnight. Trump frustrated by the questions he
received in Thursday night`s republican debate not holding back in his
attacks against moderator Megyn Kelly, trump calling in to CNN last night
with these comments.


DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Certainly I don`t have a lot of
respect for Megyn Kelly. She`s a lightweight. And you know, she came out
there reading her little script and trying to, you know, to be tough and be
shock. And when you meet her, you realized she`s not very tough and she`s
not very sharp, she`s a zippo. Well, I just don`t respect her as a
journalist. I have no respect for her. I don`t think she`s very good. I
think she`s highly overrated. She gets out and she starts asking me all
sorts of ridiculous questions. And you know, you can see there was blood
coming out of her eyes, blood coming out of her wherever, but she was -- in
my opinion she was off base.


CAPEHART: Quote, "blood coming out of her wherever." The blowback swift
this morning. Donald Trump banned from speaking today at the red state
gathering conference in Atlanta, Georgia, that he was scheduled to attend.
Event organizer Erick Erickson writing in a post at 11:56 p.m. last night
that quote, "I think there`s no way to otherwise interpret Mr. Trump`s
comment." In attempt at clarification, Mr. Trump`s team tells me he meant
whatever, not wherever adding his comment was inappropriate. It was
unfortunate to have to disinvite him. Trump was slated to be the event`s
final speaker. Erick Erickson adding that he has invited Megyn Kelly to
speak in Trump`s his place.

MSNBC political correspondent Kasie Hunt is at the red state gathering and
joins us this morning. Casey, a very quick response from red state
canceling Donald Trump. Has there been any response from the Trump
campaign on the cancellation?

out a statement calling this another example of weakness through being
politically correct. They also called Erick Erickson a weak and pathetic
leader and claimed that Trump is going to be stopping in public somewhere
other than the red state gathering today. But you know what, Jonathan, I
mean, this is an example of, you know, Trump not translating, especially in
the south. The south doesn`t really do crass especially when it comes to
women. And Ericsson`s reaction was pretty quick.

CAPEHART: And Kasie, has there been responses from other Republicans this
morning to Trump`s comments?

HUNT: So far most notably I think you had Carly Fiorina on twitter today
saying there`s no excuse for this aimed at Mr. Trump. Sean Spicer was also
on the "Today" show responding to this. Take a listen.


because he does speak off the cuff, because he doesn`t ascribe to political
correctness, was speaking, you know, in a way that wasn`t fully thought
out. But he needs to clarify that first thing this morning.


HUNT: So, a little bit tricky for the Republican Party of course. You
have Reince Priebus after the debate saying that running as a third party
candidate would be a death wish for Trump, but it would also be a real
problem for the Republican Party, and to have Trump go rogue even if it`s
over for something like this, is a potential problem for them as the party
apparatus. I think we`ve all been wondering whether there would be a point
at which Trump would go too far with some of these comments. And I think
we`ll going to have to wait a little while to see if it shakes out that
way. But taking on FOX News this way in a republican primary is a really
dangerous place to be for any candidate, whether Trump can break that set
of rules I think still remains to be seen.

CAPEHART: Kasie staying with us. Let`s bring in the panel this morning.
Here in New York, Kathleen Sebelius, former U.S. Secretary of Health and
Human Services under President Obama, as well as a former governor of
Kansas. MSNBC political analyst Michael Steele, former chairman of the
RNC. And Jonathan Allen, a reporter with Vox.

Okay, I mean, I was going to be -- we were going to be talking about Donald
Trump and his debate performance. But these comments about Megyn Kelly, I
have to go around the table, starting with you, Michael Steele.

MICHAEL STEELE, MSNBC POLITICAL ANALYST: Why are you starting with me?

CAPEHART: Mr. former -- Mr. Republican National Committee chairman.
What`s your reaction to Trump`s comments? And is this a fatal blow?

STEELE: It`s hard to say if it`s a fatal blow. We thought that John
McCain comments were a fatal blow. We thought that the comments, you know,
that he`s made before in the past were a fatal blow. I think though this
is an unnecessary if I don`t get the logic. Okay, so I`m using that term,
of going after Megyn Kelly. Megyn Kelly is not running for office. Megyn
Kelly is a reporter. We get the whole thing with the party and reporters,
and candidates and reporters. This is a fight you don`t want to get into.
And then to make it so personal, you know, it really makes it harder for
people I think going forward to look at this candidacy in a way that says,
okay, this is something serious and I can take it legitimately. I think
there was some bleeding that came from the debate on Thursday night. I
think this is now growing into a cause for real concern or should within
that campaign because the numbers I think are going to reflect that problem
that he`s beginning to build for himself. And Kasie is absolutely right.
In the south, no, this just does not play with a lot of Republicans in the

CAPEHART: Kathleen?

it doesn`t play with a lot of Republicans across the country because I
don`t think it`s the south who should be particularly offended by offensive
comments against women. It should be everybody. I was appalled at his
initial take on Megyn Kelly at the debate and the notion that, you know,
Donald Trump is offended by what is a very legitimate question, do you say
hateful, disgraceful things about women. And he personalized and attacked
her and not a single man on that stage, not a single man said, wait a
minute, you know, called him out on that. He`s now doubled down and, if I
understand correctly, still no male candidate in the Republican Party has
actually called him out on it. So I think he`s got a real problem, but I
think the whole party has a real problem when 53 percent of the voters are
women and this is a very personalized, very derogatory -- he goes after
Megyn Kelly, he goes after Rosie O`Donnell, he goes after sort of women in
general. And I think that`s a huge problem.

CAPEHART: Jonathan, before I get your reaction, Kasie, can I ask you to
Kathleen`s point, have any of the other campaigns said anything about
Donald Trump`s comments?

HUNT: So far I have not seen other campaigns respond directly. Keep in
mind this happened late at night. I have heard privately from several
other republican campaigns very interested in making sure that I was aware
that these comments had been made. So it`s certainly something that all
the other campaigns are paying very close attention to. We`re going to
hear from several of these additional candidates here today at red state.
I`m sure as the day progresses, we`re going to start to hear some more from
these other campaigns. I think, you know, there`s been some hesitant to
criticize Trump from some of these other corners, obviously John Kasich on
the debate stage saying that what Donald Trump has been doing has been

You know, because if you turn this raff that he`s turned on Megyn Kelly on
yourself, it can be a dangerous place to be, especially for the candidates
who were trying to win over the republican base. But I think that there`s
a little of a shift here. I mean, look, a lot of people I`ve talked to
just since of walking in this morning, they have been men who have said to
me, you know, what, I have a wife, I have daughters, and you don`t talk
about women like that. Now, again, I think that that`s a reflection to a
certain extent of the southern culture. I mean, they would use the word
lady to describe Megyn Kelly, for example. But I think that that really
matters and if they`re actually going to have a serious conversation about
winning this republican nomination, it goes straight through the south.
And, you know, Donald Trump is a Manhattan businessman and that`s come
across here.

CAPEHART: He`s a Manhattan billionaire. Jonathan, let`s get your reaction
to all of this?

JONATHAN ALLEN, VOX: So, number one, I think he`s so angry because she did
such a good job of making a point about a huge failing of his which is to
be respectful to anybody including women. So that`s how I look at it.
This is like the tantrum of a man who had a really bad moment on stage the
other night and is trying to make up for it. The other thing I would say
is at some point someone will stand up to him. We saw this with Carly
Fiorina. If he had said that in the bar to somebody, he would be picking
his teeth up off the floor.


ALLEN: So, you know, I`m not advocating anybody go out and punch Donald
Trump. But, you know, at some point somebody is going to do that at least
rhetorically, and somebody who has perhaps greater standing within the
Republican Party I think. And so, we`ll have to wait for that moment and
see what the reaction is.


ALLEN: But I think he lost during that debate question and he lost the
opportunity to win a lot of women voters. And I think he`s having an angry

CAPEHART: Let`s go back to before these comments to the debate. The
conversation yesterday was just, you know, if he had weathered that storm.
And we were listening to conservative radio yesterday that hear the
reaction to Trump. And take a listen to some of the things we heard.


GLENN BECK, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: The big loser was Donald Trump. And
while he continued to say things in a way that Americans will connect with,
I think he showed himself as a bully, as very un-presidential.

LAURA INGRAHAM, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: I think he dominated that debate
last night. He might not have said everything I would have said and I
think would have added some meat to the bones. But I just don`t think -- I
don`t think there was anybody blow delivered to Donald Trump. I just don`t
believe it.

RUSH LIMBAUGH, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: But the candidates did not make one
move toward taking Donald Trump out. The broadcast network did. The
candidates didn`t. I`m not getting on Megyn Kelly for asking the question.
This is a presidential debate. Here is the point. Not one of the
remaining nine candidates joined Megyn Kelly in taking the shot at Trump.
Not one.


CAPEHART: Okay. Wow. You and Rush Limbaugh, you both agree. But that`s
a mixed bag from Glenn Beck and Laura Ingraham and Rush Limbaugh. How do
you all think he did? I`ll start with you, Jonathan.

ALLEN: How did Trump do?


ALLEN: Well, I think he still appeals to the people that he appeals to who
are angry and in a lot of cases nativist and maybe in some cases sexist. I
think he`s brought out an ugly part of America in a lot of ways. And I
also wonder the extent to which some people who don`t like the media and
don`t like pollsters are telling pollsters they`ll going to vote for Donald
Trump but wouldn`t actually pull the trigger.

CAPEHART: Uh-mm. You have that mind meld with Rush Limbaugh? Your
reaction to Trump or how do you think he did?

SEBELIUS: I agree with Jonathan. And I think part of his appeal is he is
unvarnished. People like the fact that he`s a billionaire. They like his
sort of possess. But I think it goes, you know, there are sort of
guardrails and he may have leapt over the guardrail by insulting 53 percent
of the population and then doubling down on it. I mean, I think he insults
her ones for being very legitimate. She`s mean to me. I mean, this is
tough Donald Trump who can negotiate with anything about anybody is weeping
on stage because Megyn Kelly asked a tough question. I mean, I found that
sort of amusing. But then, you know, to really go after her in a very
vicious, personal way seems particularly egregious.

CAPEHART: Uh-mm. Mr. Chairman?

STEELE: I think that what was amusing to me to listen to were the
conservatives who went after FOX the day after and almost immediately after
that debate in the way that they went after Trump. I think there was some
of that reflected in the comments of Rush and others. But I think that the
key thing was for a lot of conservatives, was the fact that -- and Rush
touched on it. You didn`t have the other candidates take the moment and
drive home the point and to really kind of sort of bring in this lion
that`s on the stage sort of just roaring at everything.




No, but I think that was the key moment that did not happen, and I think
that bothers a lot of folks. What`s going on now in Georgia with red state
I think is the further reaction to that, and Erick Erickson is like we`re
not even going to pretend and go down this road and push people to get it
done the right way.

CAPEHART: Kasie Hunt, we`ll see you again in the next hour. And much more
from where you are in Atlanta. And we`ll look at what we can expect from
some of the other candidates speaking at red state now with that first
debate behind them.

While the republican candidates spent the next few weeks campaigning across
the country, President Obama will be spending some of those weeks playing
golf and going to the beach. The President along with the rest of the
first family left yesterday for their summer getaway at Martha`s Vineyard.
It`s a working vacation for President Obama as he tries to win
Congressional approval for his Iran deal, approval that got a bit more
difficult this week after Senator Chuck Schumer announced he will not
support the agreement.

NBC`s Hallie Jackson joins us live from Martha`s Vineyard.

HALLIE JACKSON, NBC NEWS CORRESPONDENT: Hey, good morning, Jonathan. Yes,
the President now taking a break for the next couple of weeks up here in
New England. But he will certainly not be disappearing from the scene
altogether. The White House not ruling out that he will be making some
phone calls to try to drum up and lock in support for his deal with Iran.
This is getting some new urgency of course after Senator Chuck Schumer
publicly came out and said he would oppose that deal. For a couple of
reasons Schumer essentially arguing that it`s the worst of both worlds.

That on the one hand, it doesn`t do enough to stop Iran from building a
nuclear weapon. And on the other, it also eliminates sanctions that he
feels are effective against the country. So, a couple House Democrats over
the last 24 hours have also come out saying that they would vote to block
this. That said, Jonathan, not going to be enough to tip the scales most
likely. We`ve seen top-level Senate Democrats including Kirsten Gillibrand
from New York come out in support and most recently, Bernie Sanders,
presidential candidate saying, he would support the deal as well --

CAPEHART: My thanks to Hallie Jackson.

Still ahead, why some Republicans` threat to shut down the government over
funding Planned Parenthood may already be losing momentum. And next, more
on Donald Trump. We`ll talk to a dreamer about his comments on
undocumented immigrants at Thursday night`s debate.



TRUMP: People that I deal with, that I talk to, they say this is what`s
happening. Because our leaders are stupid, our politicians are stupid, and
the Mexican government is much smarter, much sharper, much more cunning,
and they send the bad ones over because they don`t want to pay for them,
they don`t want to take care of them. Why should they when the stupid
leaders of the United States will do it for them? And that`s what`s
happening whether you like it or not.


CAPEHART: That was Donald Trump Thursday night, not backing away from
comments he made when he first entered the race for president, labeling
some undocumented immigrants from Mexico murderers and rapists. Trump also
renewed his call for a wall along the border.


TRUMP: We need to build a wall and it has to be built quickly. And I
don`t mind having a big, beautiful door in that wall so that people can
come into this country legally.


CAPEHART: Florida Senator Marco Rubio, who was part of the bipartisan gang
of eight that crafted the now stalled immigration reform package in 2013
poked holes in Trump`s wall plan.


that the majority of people coming across the border are not from Mexico.
They`re coming from Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras. Those countries are
the source of the people that are now coming in its majority. I also
believe we need a fence. The problem is if El Chapo builds a tunnel under
the fence, we have to be able to deal with that, too. And that`s why you
need an e-verify system and you need an entry exit tracking system in all
sorts of other things to prevent illegal immigration.


CAPEHART: Joining the panel to discuss how the Republicans tackled
immigration on debate night, activist Erika Andiola, co-director of the
DREAM Action Coalition. Erika, thanks for being here. Let me start with
your general thoughts on how the republican candidates have been handling
the issue of immigration.

thank you for having me. It`s nice to see you. You know, I was watching
the debate and I wasn`t really expected to be offended by Donald Trump.
I`m an undocumented Mexican woman. So I couldn`t expect anything else from
him. But I think for me was he`s really going into watching the debate and
seeing how the other candidates would going to react for his comments.
Unfortunately right now, he`s the one driving the entire rhetoric, you
know, for the Republican Party when it comes onto immigration. So, you
know, it`s been very offensive, you know, towards Mexicans, towards

And I was hoping that, you know, Bush or Rubio would really stand up to
that. And I think they definitely defended their views on immigration.
Bush said, you know, he would still think that undocumented folks come here
for an opportunity. But, you know, he went on to say that he wanted
sanctuary cities, to get rid of sanctuary cities. For me, you know, it
just doesn`t make the cut and you needed to really push back stronger on

CAPEHART: Erika, I was going to ask you if there was anyone on that stage
other than Donald Trump who had a stance on immigration that you could
support or gave you maybe a ray of hope, but it doesn`t sound like it at

ANDIOLA: Well, you know, I was pleased to see that Bush would still say
that, you know, he does think that it is an act to love to come to the
United States as an immigrant. He`s thought to that, you know, but you
know again, none of them and Bush`s wife is a Mexican. Rubio is a Latino.
And for me it was just, you know, at what point are they going to come out
and say your comments are racist, your comments are very offensive to our
community. No one said that. And you know, for me, I`m waiting for that
to happen. If they really want Latinos to listen to the Republican Party
right now given that they haven`t done absolutely nothing for the
undocumented community or immigrant community, they`re going to have to
step up their game.

CAPEHART: You know, Erika brought up Governor Bush`s comment about illegal
undocumented immigrants coming over as an act of love. And Michael Steele,
do you think that message will resonate with republican voters? Or do you
think he needs to take a harder stand against illegal immigration?

STEELE: No, I think he needs to stick to his guns on that. I think it is
the message that the party up until recently always supported. We`ve
always been a party of assimilation. It was something that was part of our
package, if you will, when we talked about immigration. How do we make
people who want to be here, you know, fully American? I think there are
elements of this debate that certainly need to be addressed in an ongoing
way, you know, border security, using technology, using manpower. And all
of that is given, at the end of the day, you`ll going to have to deal with
individuals like your guest and others as human beings.

And I think that that is the aspect of the Bush argument that resonates the
most and the loudest. Even though people don`t think so within the party,
I think it does. You have a lot of folks who are banging a different noise
right now. But I think in the end that argument will win out. And it was
good to see him stick to his guns. Marco Rubio, the same thing, you know,
stand-up and go back to the position you had with the gang of eight, you
know. There was nothing to be ashamed. There was nothing to back away
from there. It was all good public policy to help these individuals who
want to be here.

CAPEHART: Go ahead, Jonathan, real quick.

ALLEN: Donald Trump has given an excellent opportunity for Republicans to
stand-up and say, we can have conservative policies without being racist.
I mean, there`s an opportunity for them to do that. And they missed it on
the debate stage. But they`re going to get more chances as we`re seeing
with these Megyn Kelly comments. You know, you don`t have to be sexist,
misogynistic, whatever they have an opportunity to distance himself from

CAPEHART: Erika, we only have about 30 seconds left, but I want to ask
you, do you hope or expect going down the road that a republican candidate
will do what Jonathan said and just flat out say, this is xenophobic,
racist and here is what we need to do as a party for undocumented

ANDIOLA: I do. I hope so. And like I said, I was already hoping that it
would happen at the debate with either Rubio or Bush or anyone else.


ANDIOLA: It hasn`t happened. But, you know, I think that would distance
themselves, you know, big, big time from Trump at this point.

CAPEHART: Erika Andiola, thanks so much for being with us this morning.

ANDIOLA: Thank you.

CAPEHART: Still ahead, will Carly Fiorina`s performance at the kid`s table
be enough to earn her a sit at the main event in the next debate?

And next, a surprise decision in the sentencing of the Colorado movie
theater shooter. What led the jury to spare James Holmes from the death


CAPEHART: The man who opened fire in a Colorado movie theater three years
ago will not get the death penalty. A jury sentenced James Holmes
yesterday to life in prison without the possibility of parole. Holmes was
convicted of killing 12 people and injuring 70 others during a midnight
premier of "The Dark Knight Rises" in 2012.

MSNBC`s Scott Cohn joins us live from Centennial, Colorado, where
yesterday`s decision was announced.

SCOTT COHN, MSNBC CORRESPONDENT: Good morning, Jonathan. Yesterday`s
decision was actually a non-decision. The jury of nine women, three men
could not come to unanimous verdict on the death penalty under Colorado law
that automatically means life in prison. Members of families of the
victims were shocked, outraged, saddened, crying in the gallery. And
perhaps understandably initially we were told none of the jurors wanted to
talk about it. But then a juror identifying herself only as juror number
17 said that the public deserves answers.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I hope there will not be a backlash. We have to
respect the jury`s decision. There`s nothing that can change it at this
time. And I feel that we really truly did our best to come to a proper


COHN: She said that there was a single holdout on the jury, apparently
swayed by the defense`s argument that James Holmes was mentally ill, deeply
mentally ill and that we do not execute people who are sick. Holmes will
formally be sentenced in a three-day hearing beginning August 24th --

CAPEHART: Scott Cohn, Centennial, Colorado, thank you very much.

Still ahead. Happy hour gets political. And next, the fight to defund
Planned Parenthood takes center stage. Stay with us.


defunded Planned Parenthood, and I have viewed it seven times since then --
Planned Parenthood gets no money, no tax money for the people of the state
of New Jersey.

the Democrats in the media the following question, are you willing to shut
down the government to fund Planned Parenthood? No one ever asked that
question. There`s more outrage about a dead lion than there is about dead


CAPEHART: Republican presidential candidates continued to threaten funding
for Planned Parenthood at last night`s gathering of conservatives in
Atlanta. The health provider has become a big target on the right in the
wake of highly edited secretly recorded videos released by an anti-abortion
group. The center for medical progress alleges that Planned Parenthood is
selling fetal tissue for profit. But the videos don`t show any illegal
behavior. Now, in Thursday, Alabama became the late estate to cut off
Medicaid funds for Planned Parenthood in the wake of the controversy. And
the day before, a New Hampshire rejected a contract with the health
provider, a vote to defund Planned Parenthood nationally failed earlier
this week in the Senate. But talk of shutting down the government over the
issue continues to grow.


SEN. JOHN MCCAIN (R), ARIZONA: I don`t like a government shutdown, but
this is a clear case of totally improper use of taxpayer dollars. I have
an obligation to the taxpayers of Arizona.


CAPEHART: Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell who promised no
government shutdowns on his watch threw cold water on the idea on Thursday.


SEN. MITCH MCCONNELL (R-KY), MAJORITY LEADER: This is a tactic that`s been
tried going back to the `90s frequently by republican majorities that
always have the same ending, that the focus is on the fact that the
government is shutdown, not on what the underlying issue that is being
protested is.


CAPEHART: Again, that was Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell. And he
makes a good point. But Michael Steele, can the majority leader keep his
caucus in line and avert a government shutdown over Planned Parenthood?

STEELE: I think they`re going to try very hard. But there`s a lot of
pressure that something be done, something overt, something public be done
to draw attention to the conversation, number one, and to deal with the
problems that perceived or real with the way Planned Parenthood operates
and the questions surrounding the dollars that come in from the federal
government, where exactly do they land? How are they spent? And if think
that part of the debate is a legitimate debate to have because, I mean, as
we`ve seen from polling, yes, Planned Parenthood has support amongst the
public, but there`s also concern when it comes to questions like this, how
those dollars are being spent, taxpayer dollars which federal law requires
not be spent in that regard.

CAPEHART: Kathleen, you want to jump in here. I can see it.

SEBELIUS: Well, the law has been very clear for decades. And there has
been absolutely not a shred of evidence that the law has ever been broken
that any federal dollars are used for abortion. That`s what this debate
supposedly is about. Right? No federal dollars for abortion, that is
cooler. That is clear. It`s been the law. It is maintain -- and it`s
been in place for a long time and it continues to be in places. It`s in
place in every contract left by HHS. So, this is really about defunding
the massive contraception services, primary health care, breast cancer
screening that Planned Parenthood delivers to millions of people across the
country, and without their clinics in operation, millions of women will not
have a choice of health care providers. There is no federal money, none,
zero, zip, used for abortion funding.

STEELE: You don`t have any evidence to support that. And that`s the

SEBELIUS: It`s been investigated. It`s been looked at.

STEELE: Well, clearly not investigated enough because according to what
we`re hearing from the people who are running it, that there are some
legitimate questions that are being raised about how those dollars are
being spent when it comes to fetal tissue, getting fetal tissue, et cetera.
And so, I think from my perspective, the reality is, you`re getting federal
money, let`s throw it up in the books and do the audit and see exactly
where it goes, number one. But more importantly, why doesn`t Planned
Parenthood just separate out that function? Why doesn`t it just take that
function, the abortions that it does and put it in a separate entity that
can be privately funded? So, there is no question about federal funds
going there. It has nothing to do -- then you have that whole keep intact
and whole all those health care services that it provide. Secretary, you
know it`s on the books, it`s not the same thing as saying two separate

CAPEHART: I mean, she was the secretary of HHS. So, she of all people
would know.

SEBELIUS: It`s been alleged for a long time. It`s been investigated over
and over again. The law is clear. There has never been an allegation that
the law was broken using federal funds to fund abortion services.

CAPEHART: Jonathan.

ALLEN: So, for the Planned Parenthood folks and Democrats having the
abortion services provided by somebody that does 97 percent women`s
healthcare is a good thing politically, right? Because you can say, it`s
about women`s healthcare, it`s about contraception, and it`s true, about
STD treatment and all of those other things. So to have them lump together
is good for the Democrats. Republicans would like to stop abortions. And
to the extent that they can separate out the two things would make it
easier to cross whatever that second entity would be, if you had a second
separate entity. On the government shutdown stuff, Ted Cruz wants to shut
down the government because it`s raining, because there`s sun outside, he`s
playing golf --

So, he wants to shutdown the government. And this is like a perfect storm
for him in that he`s got an issue of conscience, right, for the republican
side that he can combine with shutting down the government and shrinking
government. But the truth is, most of these services that Planned
Parenthood provides are ones that almost everybody in the country supports.
Prescott Bush raised money for Planned Parenthood -- meaning Jeb Bush`s


ALLEN: His father created title ten under which all the Planned Parenthood
funding comes from this. Most of this stuff used to be completely non-
controversial. And the one issue was abortion. And everything else has to
be seen through the lens of one side fighting the other side over abortion
and trying to weaken the other side`s institutions.

SEBELIUS: And I would say, Jonathan, the final thing about abortion
services is the good news is that the numbers of abortions have dropped
year after year after year. Fewer women are opting for abortions, fewer
younger women. The access of now 47 million women to contraception through
their health plans is good news because they will then be able to engage in
family planning activities on their own. I think that the very services
that Planned Parenthood provides to the vast majority of people actually
reduce the numbers of abortions, provide an opportunity for families to
make their own choices about when and if to have a child. So it`s somewhat
ironic that if you canceled out the contraception services, if you
eliminate the opportunity --

STEELE: No one is talking about that.

SEBELIUS: Defunding Planned Parenthood will do just that.

STEELE: Nobody is talking about that. I love that --

SEBELIUS: Defunding Planned Parenthood would do just that.

STEELE: They`re very clear about what they want to defund. They`re not
talking about defunding those services.


SEBELIUS: Defunding Planned Parenthood would do just that.

STEELE: But Planned Parenthood can get its money for abortion services
from other sources. That`s why --

SEBELIUS: It not just the money for abortion services. It doesn`t come
from the federal government.

STEELE: Well, you need to show me that because I`m not convinced.

SEBELIUS: Canceling out federal government funding is the whole thing.

ALLEN: I`m just saying. Well, there are a whole lot of folks out here who
are concerned and curious about that, and I think that from Planned
Parenthood`s position as well as from the national debate as a whole, then,
look, let`s get the clarity on it and let`s see where the money goes. When
it comes in the door, where does it go? What buckets does it go into and
how much?

CAPEHART: We have to go here. This conversation obviously is going to
continue on future shows.

Still ahead, the former politician who was apparently funnier than Jon
Stewart at least according to one acquaintance who spent several summers
with the two of them.

And next, one participant in the so-called kid sail debate may not have
been too thrilled to be attending. Who won the so-called happy hour
debate? We`ll talk about that, next.



will make two phone calls. The first one would be to my friend Bibi
Netanyahu to reassure him we will stand at the State of Israel. The second
will be to the supreme leader of Iran. He might not take my phone call but
he would get the message, and the message is this, "Until you open every
nuclear and every military facility to full, open, anytime, anywhere for
real inspections, we are going to make it as difficult as possible for you
to move money around the global financial system."


CAPEHART: That was Carly Fiorina, the former Hewlett Packard chief
executive and the only woman running for the GOP nomination. She won the
5:00 p.m. debate according to many political analysts, myself included.
She seemed the most prepared and most serious about her candidacy.


FIORINA: We have arrived at a point in our nation`s history where the
potential of this nation, and too many Americans is being crushed by the
weight, the power, the cost, the complexity, the ineptitude, the corruption
of the federal government. And only someone who will challenge the status
quo of Washington, D.C. can lead the resurgence of this great nation. I
will do that.


CAPEHART: Was Fiorina`s strong showing Thursday evening enough to improve
her standing in the polls? Will we see her on the main stage at the next
debate? Should we see her on the main stage at the next debate? We`ll
throw this open to the table.

Kathleen, I mean, I thought Carly Fiorina did an excellent job in the
debate compared to all the other guys, literally guys on that stage. What
do you make of her?

SEBELIUS: I thought she was smart and tough. I think it`s difficult to
run for president as your first elected political office. That`s a big
leap. And being in a campaign is a tough slog. So, we`ll see. She did
well on the debate. I think she has some good points to make. But you`re
right. She is the only woman in a stage full of lots of guys. And she did
distinguish herself as being serious and thoughtful. I don`t agree with a
lot of her positions.

CAPEHART: Right. And neither do I.

SEBELIUS: But was she good in the debate with the happy hour kids? I
think she did very well.

ALLEN: Look Gulliver -- but actually I`ll make the argument the Republican
Party won because Carly Fiorina won. And that is to say she`s the only
woman in the race and incredibly competent. And I think it`s going to be
impossible to keep her -- maybe not impossible, it`s untenable to keep her
off the debate stage in the future, particularly when you have this Trump-
Megyn Kelly thing going on. I think it`s only good for the Republican
Party to show that it`s got a broader tent.

STEELE: But they didn`t call it a happy hour debate for nothing. Because
everyone was drinking and no one was watching. And that was unfortunate
for the party, I think. I`ve always had a problem with the way this was
set up. And I think Carly Fiorina`s success proved the point. She should
have been on the main stage Thursday night. And the fact that she wasn`t I
think makes it very clear that for the next one she will be. I don`t care
what the damn polls say. She needs to be on that stage to have her voice
amongst those others to show those men how to run for president because she
has been the only one so far who has laid out I think an effective
argument, whether you agree or disagree with it, whether it`s on the
economy, on national security or whatever the issue happens to be, and I
think that voice, her voice is going to be an important element going

CAPEHART: And you talked about how no one was watching and having a
problem with how this was set up. I mean, if you looked around that arena,
there was no one in the room. And Lindsey Graham I think said, Senator
Graham said on "Morning Joe" that it was like sort of having a debate with
yourself in the bathroom. They had no one to feed off of.


ALLEN: Such a colorful analogy.

STEELE: You say something and you kind of wait for the reaction and it
didn`t come. You`re like, okay, let`s move on, you know?

CAPEHART: But I mean, is there anything any of the candidates could have
done to make an impact? I mean, we saw Carly Fiorina made the most of it.
She used that format very well. Any of these other cats, is there anything
they could have done?

STEELE: No. Look, you can`t -- you cannot do it the way you want to do it
when you don`t get a reaction. So you`re really just talking. And you`re
having a conversation. Because they`re not even reacting amongst
themselves that much. So, you know, I thought she was the most effective
of taking advantage of the room, taking advantage of the situation and
that`s because she was prepared and she has a sense of what she wants to do
as president.

ALLEN: Who do you think did the best job of going after Hillary Clinton?


CAPEHART: I mean, well, that`s her main thing.

STEELE: Well, but she was good at it.

CAPEHART: Yes, definitely.

SEBELIUS: Well, we talked about, are the other debates going to be like
this? So will you have now people sent from the big stage to the kids`
table and will you have someone called up to sit next to their grandmother?
It`s very interesting, and I think not particularly helpful dynamic for the
party or for the American people to try and figure out who all these folks
are and then not have them actually be able to be compared side by side.
It is a split screen that doesn`t work very well.

CAPEHART: I wish we could talk more about this, because I mean, the whole
kids, I know, especially you, Michael Steele. Still ahead, a red state
gathering with red meat for the base. And next, a river runs yellow. Stay
with us.


CAPEHART: There is a lot going on this morning. Let`s get caught up some
of the other headlines making the news today with the panel. So, here is a
story in "The New York Times." Waste water spill in Colorado turns a river
yellow. I think that was the picture we showed going into break. Look at


STEELE: That`s not good.

SEBELIUS: Why would they be in that water?

CAPEHART: I know, I mean, that`s like a really good pumpkin soup color.

SEBELIUS: And he`s in a hazmat suit.

CAPEHART: His face is not covered. But The Times says, the EPA,
Environmental Protection Agency caused the spill on Wednesday while
investigating a leak at an abandoned mine. One million gallons of
wastewater containing heavy metal such as led and arsenic have contaminated
the river --

STEELE: I think it was Obama`s fault.


SEBELIUS: Of course it is.

STEELE: I knew you were going to say that.

ALLEN: That would be EPA finding the EPA?

CAPEHART: That would be interesting, the EPA finding the EPA. But I mean,
that`s --

SEBELIUS: That`s disgusting.

CAPEHART: That`s really gross.


SEBELIUS: It does.

ALLEN: Will it catch on fire?

SEBELIUS: We don`t want that water.

CAPEHART: Okay. So, we have 90 seconds left. Washingtonian, what was it
like sharing a beach house with Jon Stewart? The Washingtonian editor
Sherick Dalfan (ph) wrote this week about her experience at a Delaware
Beach House in the late `80s and early `90s. And if you look in that
picture, you can see Jon Stewart. And she said, the amazing thing is, Jon
wasn`t always the funniest guy in the beach house. Anthony Weiner often
made me laugh just as hard. Now, here is the picture. Jon is there on the
far right. I can`t tell which one of these dudes is Anthony Weiner. Do
you see him?

ALLEN: You`ve seen other pictures before.


SEBELIUS: I don`t think you need to drill down on the picture.

CAPEHART: This is from the `80s.


STEELE: Just looking at the wrong picture, that`s all.

CAPEHART: He is a funny guy.

ALLEN: I don`t think he`s more funny than Jon Stewart, but he`s a funny

CAPEHART: He`s a funny guy. More of this stuff, next.

A full hour of hour of news and politics still ahead including the drama
unfolding in Georgia this morning. Donald Trump saying, he will still
speak today after being banned from a republican conference. Stay with us.




CAPEHART: Thanks for staying with us this Saturday morning.

The first Republican debate might have ended almost 36 hours ago, but
the fallout from it, including Donald Trump`s interaction with moderator
Megyn Kelly, continues to reverberate. Now, comments he made after the
debate have cost him a spot at one of the most prominent conservative
gatherings this weekend. We`ll go live to Atlanta for details and the
fallout for this latest Trump controversy.

Now, she may be the most well-known contestant ever on Trump`s show,
"The Apprentice." Omarosa, a woman so famous you know her by just her
first name, will be joining us live on our set to discuss what she thinks
of Donald, the presidential candidate.

And while all the talk this week has been centered on the Republican
debate, we finally found out when Democrats will square off. The schedule
isn`t sitting well with some of the candidates. We`ll explain why.

But we begin this morning with Donald Trump, who has been kicked out
of a Republican voters` conference after new remarks about FOX News`s Megyn
Kelly. Presidential candidate Donald Trump calling in to CNN last night
continuing a two-day tirade against Megyn Kelly for what he perceived as
unfair questions in Thursday night`s debate.

Take a listen.


lot of respect for Megyn Kelly. She`s a lightweight, and you know, she
came out there reading her little script and trying to, you know, be tough
and be sharp.

And when you meet her, you realize she`s not very tough and she`s not
very sharp. She`s zippo.

Well, I just don`t respect her as a journalist. I have no respect
for her. I don`t think she`s very good. I think she`s highly overrated.

She gets out and she starts asking me all sorts of ridiculous
questions. And you know, you could see there was blood coming out of her
eyes, blood coming out of her wherever, but she was -- in my opinion, she
was off base.


CAPEHART: New this morning, Erick Erickson, the organizer of the
conference Trump was scheduled to speak at today saying Trump is no longer
invited. Erickson took the stage moments ago to explain his decision.


disinvited Donald Trump.


ERICKSON: I`ve got my wife here, I`ve got my daughter here, I have
800 friends of mine here. It`s a family friendly program. If he`s not
going to clarify that this isn`t what he meant, I don`t think I want him at
my event.


CAPEHART: Republicans at large coming out against Trump this
morning. George Pataki saying the outrage over Trump`s rhetoric is
overdue. Carly Fiorina tweeting, quote, "Mr. Trump, there is no excuse,
and I stand with @MegynKelly."

Let`s go to MSNBC political correspondent Kasie Hunt for more on the
conservative reaction to Trump`s comments and what he`s saying.

Kasie, what`s going on down there?

Jonathan, to start off this morning. And we do have a little more of a
clarification from Donald Trump on his comments, although not an apology.

He tweeted just a few minutes ago, Re Megyn Kelly, quote, "you could
see there was blood coming out of her eyes, blood coming out of her
wherever," end quote, and then in parenthesis, he writes "nose". Just got
on with thought.

So, apparently, he`s trying to say now that he was talking about
Megyn Kelly`s nose in those comments he made with Don Lemon. Although we
did have Erick Erickson up on stage talking about how he was on the phone
back and forth with the Trump campaign last night trying to get them to
explain what did he really mean? Did he mean what it appeared that he
meant initially, and there was no clarification, no attempts to apologize.
And that`s why in part Erickson says he`s disinvited Trump.

He also went on to say after that clip he played he didn`t want his
daughter in the same room with Trump. And that`s why he hadn`t been
invited to this conference. And it was met with a smattering of boos, but
mostly cheers. Clearly some people here in this room who are interested in
seeing Trump. Erickson did have to say he would refund the money for
anybody who came here and wanted to see Trump and had now been

CAPEHART: Interesting. Kasie Hunt down there in Atlanta, thank you.

Donald Trump overshadowing something of a victory lap for a speaker
yesterday at the RedState gathering, Carly Fiorina. Fiorina receiving a
standing ovation as she walked on stage yesterday fresh off what many
considered a standout performance in Thursday night`s early debate, a label
Fiorina seemed proud of.


think we kind of rumbled last night. What do you think?

You know, sometimes, we tend to think of politics as a game, a sport,
you know, and everybody got ready for fight night last night. You know, it
kind of feels like a sport and a game. The only thing is, of course,
politics, while it sometimes can be fun like a sport or maybe disappointing
like a sport, it`s not a game because politics and politicians and the
policies they pursue impact every single person`s life.


CAPEHART: I want to bring in Arthur Brooks. He is the president of
the American Enterprise Institute and author of the new book "The
Conservative Heart: How to Build a Fairer, Happier and More Prosperous

And the panel is back with me, too -- Kathleen Sebelius, Michael
Steele and Jonathan Allen.

Arthur, let me start with you. We`ll get to Carly in just one
second. But I do want to get your thoughts on Donald Trump`s comments last

It was ridiculous, and I think Erick Erickson did the right thing. That`s
all there is to say I think, right?

CAPEHART: Yes, I guess that is all there is to say.

Let me ask you about Carly Fiorina. She was lauded for her
performance at Thursday night`s debate. She spoke yesterday at RedState to
a more energized crowd. Do you think she`ll be able to force her way into
the next debate?

BROOKS: Yes, I think so. I mean, what happens ordinarily, at this
point in Republican politics, is you get people who are surging sort of
month by month by month. We`re in the middle of the first surge. We`re
going to get later surges. And I think she`s probably going to get one of

She`s talking the right way. She`s talking about aspiration as
opposed to just talking about anger. I think that`s going to play really
well. It should play really well.

Look, Jonathan, the main thing that has to happen if the Republicans
want to be successful, and you and I have talked about this a great deal
already, is that the Republicans need to be the aspiration party, the party
of optimism. They have to have real policies on how to talk about poverty,
how to lift people up, and if they don`t, if they don`t -- if they don`t,
they`re going to lose in 2016. If they do, they can win on a walk, if they
actually come in and start offering solutions for the most vulnerable
people who need opportunity the most.

CAPEHART: You know, Arthur, I`ve been reading your book and, in
fact, I have it right here. I`m curious -- you touched on this in your
answer a second ago. But I`m curious, if you recognize any of the tenets
of what you`ve been writing about in any of the candidates either on that
stage Thursday night or over the past few days and to your mind, who won
the debate?

BROOKS: Well, who won the debate, that`s tricky for me. I`m looking
at technically what`s going on with each of them. I never have a good
sense of that. Although I have to say, I think Marco Rubio did well. I
thought some of Jeb Bush`s later answers were really very good, very
optimistic, very aspirational. I think Scott Walker was pretty polished.

So, a lot of them had some pretty performances I thought. And I
thought the questions were really good, by the way, as well.

Now, when you look at them when they`re doing their speeches on the
stump, I`m hearing more and more talk about who is going to do the best for
the people who have been left behind in the past decade in this country, a
more optimistic vision of where the country can go, better sense of the
moral consensus of how opportunity has to be at the center of our society
so that we don`t treat liberals -- we as conservatives don`t treat liberals
as the enemy all the time and there can be more flexibility.

Look, if we go in this direction, it can be a new day. I`m hearing
it more and more from the candidates. I`m pretty optimistic about where
it`s going to go.

CAPEHART: You say you`re hearing it more and more from the
candidates. Specifically who? Who`s got the hopeful, optimistic --

BROOKS: From Jeb Bush.


BROOKS: Jeb bush, Marco Rubio, more and more Scott Walker. And
you`re going to hear it more and more I think from Chris Christie as he
starts to get more play along these lines.

Who knows what we`ll hear from the other candidates as well, but
those four for sure.

CAPEHART: And are you -- before I throw it out to the table, I`m
sorry, Arthur, I`ve got you here so I`m going to ask as many questions as
you can. Are you disappointed that topics like income inequality or
childhood poverty or any of those things came up at the debate Thursday

BROOKS: Yes, I was disappointed. But the key thing is not exactly
what was asked. The key thing is for people to show leadership by pivoting
to those issues.

This is a really important thing for the presidential candidates to
do. Look, you`re going to be asked what you`re going to be asked. You`re
going to be asked about social issues and things that are divisive and
things that tend to be pessimistic. Your job as a leader is to pivot what
matters the most. Childhood poverty, opportunity inequality, people who
are being left behind, a foreign policy that`s based on an optimistic
vision of American leadership around the world.

Look, if they can`t pivot to those things, they`re not gong to look
like leaders. If they do, on the other hand, Americans are going to

CAPEHART: Jonathan, you`ve been chomping at the bit while Arthur was

JONATHAN ALLEN, VOX: I think there`s an optimism gap, like a problem
in that you`ve got Republican candidates predicated, particularly Jeb Bush
and Chris Christie, predicated doing something for the middle class and
working class on 4 percent economic growth a year throughout their
presidencies. That`s insane. That`s not going to happen.

So, what they`re saying is let`s turn to the middle class, and turn
to the lower income workers and help them once we`ve got the 4 percent
growth. If the 4 percent growth doesn`t happen, then they don`t benefit.

And so, I think that`s a problem with the aspirational talk without
backing it up with some policies that talk about how you actually do
targets and benefits to folks basically on the losing end of a huge income
and wealth disparity.

Well, I also think you`ve got a dynamic where millennials this year are the
largest population in the United States. They`ve exceed the number of baby

They`re also the most economically challenged generation we`ve had, a
lot of them emerging from school with big debt. They are struggling in
this economy. No conversations about that. Governors on the stage have
slashed higher education budgets in their states, and that causes more
tuition increases to fall on students and parents.

So, there`s a little bit of a gap in just reality versus aspiration.
I think it`s one thing to talk about things. I think what they do about
things is very different. And I would agree with Jonathan that, if you
predicate everything on unrealistic economic growth, but also you heard
everybody on stage basically doubling down on increasing the size of the
military. So, if you look at the federal budget, if you actually grow the
military to the point that some of them were discussing that they would
like to do, where does the money come from? And how do -- the math doesn`t
work very well.

CAPEHART: Chairman Steele?

exactly right. That gets into weeds of policy.

SEBELIUS: Exactly.

STEELE: No, you`re exactly right. You cannot promise what you can`t
deliver, but that`s politics. So, we know that.

But I think to Arthur`s key point, and this is what I love about his
book and highly recommend people read it, it is the aspirational aspect.
You want to understand Donald Trump. It`s more about the aspirations that
he is bringing out of people, someone who is being authentic and real and
at least giving me a sense that they`re willing to fight for something I
believe in or something I want.

So, a lot of the stuff that both of you are talking about does not --
is not cheapened, is not lessened, is not unimportant. But you`ve got to
begin to -- I think to Arthur`s point, you`ve got to begin to turn phrase,
to bring people`s attention to the idea that we can and will do better. We
can be better and then grow from there. Then you get into the policy
because that becomes real important. You know, then, it`s a guns butter

CAPEHART: You touched on Donald Trump.

I want to go back to this morning`s headline about Donald Trump. New
reaction from GOP presidential candidate Chris Christie telling the Brody
file that Trump should not be in presidential politics saying, quote, "I
like him. I think he`s a good guy. I think he`s got a lot of skills, but
I just don`t think for this. I think he`s not right for this."

And that was yesterday. Jonathan?

ALLEN: How can you call him a good guy while all this is going on?
No, he`s not. He`s not.

Look, he may do some good things with his money or whatever. At the
end of the day, he is driving divisiveness in America, like an anger, a
hatred in America. He`s saying sexist things. He`s saying anti-immigrant,
anti-Hispanic things.

This is not somebody who should be praised. There shouldn`t be a
real caveat there where he likes the guy. He just wants to win Donald
Trump`s voters.

STEELE: But understand, when Erick Erickson made that announcement,
it wasn`t a round of applause from everyone in the room. There were also

So, that`s the tightrope these candidates are going to be walking on.
As much as we can sit around and go after Donald Trump and say he shouldn`t
say this and shouldn`t say that, there are people out there who still want
to see him. They still want to hear him, and that`s going to drive him and
motivate him to stay in this race.

SEBELIUS: But I think that`s the issue. If you have candidates who
sell their soul to try and get the voters of Donald Trump who believe in
some of the things he`s saying, hateful, anti immigrant, hateful against
women --

CAPEHART: Morally objectionable.

SEBELIUS: -- calling everybody stupid -- I have a 3-year-old
grandson who is scolded by using the word "stupid". That is not how he`s
being raised.

So, you have a grownup on the stage who is basically calling every
human being who disagrees with him stupid, lightweight. I mean, that`s
just offensive to people at large. And he should be called out on that.


CAPEHART: Right. As I said, I think his comments are morally

Arthur, let me bring it back to you. In terms of talking about
aspirational qualities of the candidates that Chairman Steele was talking
about, one person who didn`t come up in any of our conversations was Ohio
Governor John Kasich who, as I`m reading your book and listening to
Governor Kasich, to my mind he`s someone who comes the closest to what
you`re arguing for, the conservative movement and the Republican Party
should be moving towards.

BROOKS: Yes, he hasn`t broken through into the front line yet. But
if he does, assuming he does, he could do really well because he`s doing
exactly this.

Let me address just for a second the more progressive members of the
panel who say the problem is not that Republicans are not aspirational
enough, it`s that they can`t do these things to which they aspire, such as
4 percent growth. Look, this is the classic progressive line, is that
Republicans can`t be optimists because they can`t do the things they set
out to do.

More growth? Of course we can get more growth. Lifting people up
through opportunity as opposed to treating people like liabilities to
manage, which is what we`ve been doing over the past eight years, of
course, we can do those things.

So, give Republicans a break. Give them some space to try to do
these types of things as opposed to dismissing their ideas out of hand.
That`s what I would suggest, because if we do that, then we can -- liberals
and -- I mean, Jonathan and I have talked about this a lot -- look,
liberals and conservatives can come together around the moral consensus of
more opportunity for the people at the bottom, and then we can have a
competition of policy ideas.

Let`s not just dismiss these things out of hand as impossible or that
somehow Republicans don`t want to do these things.

CAPEHART: Arthur, you have lit a fire at this table that I have to
snuff out right now.

But, Arthur Brooks, president of the American Enterprise Institute --
thank you so much for coming on the show this morning.

BROOKS: Thank you, my friend. Great to talk to you.

CAPEHART: You, too.

Still ahead, joined by a self-identified Trump whisperer.

And next, a Republican presidential contender gives an impassioned
defense of Medicaid expansion.

Stay with us.



TRUMP: We have to end Obamacare and we have to make our country
great again, and I will do that.

things we can do is get the government out of the way, repeal Obamacare.

and replace Obamacare.


CAPEHART: The Affordable Care Act has extended health insurance to
more than 16 million Americans and survived two Supreme Court challenges.
But Republican presidential hopefuls are campaigning to get rid of it once
again. While on Capitol Hill, Mitch McConnell said Republicans are poised
to use a special once a year budget procedure to put legislation repealing
Obamacare on the president`s desk.

But among all the attacks on Obamacare this week, one Republican
stood out for his strong defense of expanding Medicaid under the new law.


instead of them having to come into the emergency rooms where it costs
more, where they`re sicker and we end up paying, we brought a program in
here to make sure that people can get on their feet. And you know what?
Everybody has a right to their God-given purpose.


CAPEHART: Now, before we get to Kathleen -- because this is a
Kathleen-focused segment, who obviously has a strong connection to the
health care law -- let`s start with those comments from Governor Kasich.

Chairman Steele, did he make the case to Republicans by standing firm
on his controversial Medicaid decision?

STEELE: I think he did. Yes, I think he did. Unlike what we saw
with Mitt Romney in 2012, he owned what he did. That you have to respect,
agree or disagree with it, he owned what he did. And he laid out why he
did it. He did it from a policy standpoint. He did it from the executive
role that he has to play in governing over the people of this state.

He also did it from a compassionate standpoint, recognizing that, you
know, while I have problems with this policy and this may not be the way I
would absolutely do it, I cannot leave off the table the opportunity to
help people, particularly our seniors, particular those who are poor when
they most need that help. I think that`s a very powerful argument for
particularly someone to make like him, going back to our conversation with
Arthur Brooks, that`s the type of aspirational compassionate conservatism
that I think the country is going to be looking for. I think Kasich well
positioned himself to make the broader argument.

CAPEHART: I see you Kathleen, wanting to jump in.

SEBELIUS: Well, two governors on that stage, Republican governors
have expanded Medicaid. Chris Christie also expanded Medicaid in New

CAPEHART: He hasn`t talked about it much.

SEBELIUS: He does not talk about it much, but it is the reality --
30 governors, Republicans and Democrats, have at least attempted a couple -
- a couple of Republicans have been blocked by their legislators. But so -
- you got two-thirds of the governors in this country moving forward. And
actually, it`s 242 million people now who have health insurance either in
the marketplace or Medicaid based on the Affordable Care Act.

And I think, again, I agree with Chairman Steele. If you think about
Arthur Brooks` aspirational issue, if you think about lifting people up,
providing health care so that they don`t go bankrupt if they get sick, they
can have access to mental health care which John Kasich talked about or
primary health care or make sure they can take care of their kids and their
family and they become productive workers, I think there`s something so
morally wrong with leaving that program on the table and saying to the
lowest income workers of your state, because of my politics, we`re not
expanding your health care.

CAPEHART: I mean, the big triumph of the Affordable Care Act lies in
that number you just mentioned, 22 million people now have health care.

A new poll out this week finds people who got insurance through the
health care marketplaces are let`s satisfied with their plans than people
who are covered by their employer, Medicaid or Medicare. What`s your
response to that?

SEBELIUS: I`ve seen that poll. I`ve also seen other polls that say
70 percent of the people who got marketplace coverage are very satisfied.
So, I don`t know what to believe. What I do know is that this is an
opportunity for those people who didn`t have affordable coverage in the
workplace or who are too poor to actually even qualify for workplace help
to have health care.

And it`s been talked about by Republicans and Democratic presidents.
It`s finally the law of the land.

Is it the perfect bill? Absolutely not. Does it need to be fixed?
You bet.

But somebody needs to ask the Republicans who stand up and pledge to
repeal where are they going to get difficult dynamic scoring $137 billion
that the congressional budget office just said repealed costs up to $500
billion which is the original score.

Nobody talks about that. Health care costs are rising at the lowest
rate in 50 years. Medicare beneficiaries are taking advantage of that,
Medicaid in states across the country are taking advantage of that. So,
we`re seeing not only an expansion of health care, the largest drop of
uninsured ever in the history of this country, but actually the lowest
health inflation we`ve ever had.

CAPEHART: But here`s one problem that`s rearing its head. And that
is health insurance companies are seeking big rate increases for 2016.
Many people buying plans on the exchange are facing high deductibles. And
even with the tax credits, the cost of health care is still too high for
many Americans.

And you talked about how the law is not perfect. How do you think
the law can be fixed to respond to this?

SEBELIUS: Well, actually the initial rate filings are just that,
initial rate filings. As a former -- in one of my former lives I was the
insurance commissioner.

CAPEHART: Insurance commissioner, that`s right. Yes.

SEBELIUS: Insurance commissioners across this country have an
opportunity to look at those rates, to negotiate those rates and to decide
on the ultimate rates, and I hope they do. I hope they get involved and
look at what the underlying trends are.

These are brand new customers for the private insurers in this
country. This is not the government takeover. This is the private
insurance market. Year-in, year-out, the ten years before the law was
passed, double digit increases for people who bought their insurance in the
private market. That`s no longer the case. They have been going up at a
much slower pace. There are some big rate increases by some plans in some
markets proposed.

People have choices that they have never had before. So they have a
range of plans, they have a range of options, and I think that what I`ve
seen preliminarily, there are no final rates in the market yet. But
preliminarily, it looks like most people will still have very affordable
choices, again, that they have never had before and be able to ensure
themselves and their families.

STEELE: But I`m still stuck in my market. I`m stuck in my market.
I can`t get out of my market.

So, if my market is going up at a faster rate than the market next to
me or the market across the country, I don`t have the ability to put myself
in a better market so I am stuck where I am.

CAPEHART: And, unfortunately, Chairman Steele, you`re going to have
to have that conversation during the break.

Because still ahead, why Bernie Sanders will be speaking at one of
the most conservative colleges in the country.

And next, Ferguson prepares to mark the one-year anniversary of
Michael Brown`s death. A look at the protests that have already taken
place this week.


CAPEHART: Tomorrow marks the one-year anniversary of the shooting
death of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri. People gathered yesterday in
the St. Louis suburb to begin marking the remembrance. More peaceful
demonstrations are expected throughout the weekend. A Ferguson police
officer shot and killed Michael Brown last year. The officer was later
cleared of any charges.

But Brown`s death sparked weeks of violent protests in Ferguson.
Eventually, the National Guard was brought in to help keep the peace.
We`ll have live reports from Ferguson tomorrow morning here on UP.

But still ahead, fired by Donald Trump on "The Apprentice" not once
by three times. Omarosa joins us in studio to give us her take on Trump`s
campaign and whether his public persona meshes with what happens behind the

But next, the Democratic National Committee releasing their 2016
debate schedule, but some of the candidates are unhappy with it. We`ll
tell you why.

Stay with us.


CAPEHART: While the Republicans battled away at each other on the
debate stage Thursday, the Democratic field was getting word of how their
debate schedule will shape up in just a few weeks. The Democratic National
Committee announcing a series of six debates for the presidential hopefuls
over the next year, the first taking place on October 13th. Front runner
Hillary Clinton`s Democratic challengers are unhappy with fewer chances to
challenge her.


mistake for the DNC to take upon itself the real of trying to limit the
number of debates that the Democratic Party has. It`s very un-Democratic
of the DNC to try to limit the number of debates that the Democratic Party


CAPEHART: That former Governor Martin O`Malley of Maryland.

And I`m throwing this out to the table.

Kathleen, I`m going to start with you. I mean, Hillary Clinton is
probably very content with the debate schedule. Do the other candidates
have a legitimate gripe here about wanting to debate more?

SEBELIUS: Well, the Democratic National Committee announced six
debates, one a month going forward. There are five candidates who all will
be on the stage.

CAPEHART: No kids` table.

SEBELIUS: No happy hour debate, no second tier, which means all of
those candidates are going to get a lot more air time than probably any of
the Republicans until you get to very late in the schedule. So, I think,
to me, six debates in one month at a time seems to be a pretty rigorous way
to go about exposing Democratic candidates to the American public.

CAPEHART: And that`s -- how many Republican debates are there, nine?


CAPEHART: But nine with 17.


STEELE: It won`t be nine with 17. By the time you get to six,
seven, eight, nine.

SEBELIUS: But I`m saying from day one, you`ll have everybody on the
stage and they get a fifth of the time.

STEELE: We hope. But you go, Martin, you go.

CAPEHART: Jon, you wrote a book about Hillary Clinton.

ALLEN: I co-wrote it.

CAPEHART: With Amie Parness.

ALLEN: Who lives in your building.

CAPEHART: Well, former building. But anyway, that`s not the
question, about her time in the State Department, but, you know, the e-mail
scandal continues to dog her. "The New York Post," you take that for what
it`s worth, is reporting the FBI is investigating Hillary`s e-mails and
saying it is a, quote, criminal probe.

You think she`s being hurt by all this?

ALLEN: I do. I think it`s hurting the question of honesty and
trustworthiness. Right now, she`s got this interesting dichotomy where
she`s leading the Democratic field by a lot. She`s leading Republican
contenders and most of the American public doesn`t think she`s honest or
trustworthy. I`d love to get Governor Sebelius` thoughts on that, having
been an Obama supporter in 2008, I`m curious what you think about that at
some point.

I think it`s hurting her for this reason. It show as pattern -- you
look at this with the interesting relationship that Huma Abedin had with
the State Department when she became a contractor and starting getting paid
by an outside firm and then was also being paid by the U.S. government --
you see this pattern of running into a rule, running into a law and saying
not is it legal for me to do this, but how can I do this legally? What`s
the loophole I can walk through? What`s the loophole I can do this and
sort of get around the spirit of the law?

And I think people see that. I think that`s a problem for her going
forward unless she can find a way to explain it or change the behavior.

CAPEHART: I mean, people see that. I was in North Dakota, Minnesota
a couple weeks ago, weekends ago. There are people who are saying, we
don`t care about the e-mails. So, how do you explain that dichotomy? I
mean, we`re all sitting around talking about it. It`s big, big news. Out
literally in the heartland in the middle of the country, they don`t --

STEELE: You have explained Donald Trump. We have the exact same
conversation about Donald Trump.

You know, we don`t -- I mean, how many times did we see even in the
New Hampshire focus group people saying, well, we don`t care about the
bankruptcies. We don`t care about all this stuff attendant to Donald

And the same is on the Democrat side. You have people who are
looking at this outside the Acela corridor, who are saying to themselves,
the email thing doesn`t -- I don`t really care about that. But it does
translate to your point into something, because, clearly, the trustworthy
numbers and likability numbers are not where the campaign would need them
to be.

So, there is something going on out there that I think would be
interesting. That`s point one. The final quick point is, I`ll be curious
to see if those debates whether or not any of the other candidates start
using words like trustworthy and whether they start using words like
likability, not directly going after Hillary, but making it -- making the
point that we really don`t trust this woman right here.


CAPEHART: Real quickly. Yes?

ALLEN: So, it is possible the American public will trust her to run
the country but not trust what she says, right?

So, the honest trustworthy questions are sort of a specific thing
about whether they trust what she`s saying. They may not trust what she`s
saying but trust her to be a good leader.

SEBELIUS: Well, I was going to say I think the polls continue to be
pretty overwhelming. People understand Hillary Clinton is incredibly
accomplished, incredibly knowledgeable, a very strong leader, well-poised
to lead this country.

And to me, at the end of the day, that`s what the debate will be
about with the American public. Is this the leader for the future? What
are the plans, and back to the discussion we were having earlier, what`s
the aspiration for the people who are now in the big gap?

CAPEHART: You know, we keep teasing Bernie Sanders and the big
speech he`s going to give. He`s going to conservative Christian school,
Liberty University, founded by Jerry Falwell, as the convocation speaker.
The university says it`s very easy for a candidate to speak to people who
hold the same views. It`s harder but important to reach out to others who
look at the world differently.

What do you make of this move?

STEELE: I think it`s wonderful. I think it is what our candidates
need to do.

You know, Jeb Bush said at the beginning of his campaign, I`m willing
to lose the primary to win the general. I think that is something that
applies across the aisle. I think Bernie Sanders is playing a little bit
into that. He`s going outside of his comfort zone. He`s going into a
space where he knows his typical stump speech message will not resonate
necessarily with a lot of the folks in that audience. But he`s going there

Rand Paul, going to HBCUs and going into the community to strike up a
conversation whether you like the outcome of it or not, I think is what we
need to see more from politicians who want to lead.

SEBELIUS: Well, I agree. We are one United States, and the notion I
only talk to people who agree with me -- unfortunately, I think our press
commentary sometimes has been very divided in terms of views, I only watch
with the people who agree with me and go to places who agree with me.

I would agree strongly with the chairman that we need a broader
conversation, we need diverse views and we need people to listen to one

CAPEHART: Right. I misspoke in reading that quote. That was not
from Liberty University, but from Senator Sanders himself.

But up next, one of the most memorable contestants from "The
Apprentice" is here, you see her right there, to weigh in on the Donald
debate performance. Omarosa will tell us what it`s really like to go head-
to-head with The Donald.



TRUMP: Omarosa, you were the project manager.


TRUMP: And you not only lost, you got creamed. I`ve always been a
big Omarosa fan, but, Omarosa, you`re fired. This was not close.


TRUMP: That, of course, was Donald Trump, dismissing "Apprentice"
contestant Omarosa - only one named needed to describe one of the show`s
most memorable contestants. Omarosa faced off with Donald Trump for not
one, but three seasons and 75 episodes in the famed board room, giving her
some unique insight into what the GOP hopefuls were up against Thursday

And joining us here live in studio, on set, Omarosa.

MANIGAULT: Hi, everybody.

CAPEHART: Thank you for coming in.

MANIGAULT: You know, I like the intro for "The Apprentice", but I
have to give my political background. I worked in the Clinton White House.
I worked at the DNC as a fundraiser. And I teach branding and marketing at
Howard University. So, As much as I love "The Apprentice," there`s much
more to me than the boardroom.

CAPEHART: Well, it`s because of the boardroom that you`re here, it`s
because of your dueling with Donald Trump that you`re here, and it`s
because of the unique insights that all that experience gives you that we
invite you here.

Talk to us about Donald Trump. Are you surprised by anything that
happened on that debate stage Thursday?

MANIGAULT: I`m not surprised at all. That first moment set the tone
that he was a true leader that could not be controlled, manipulated or
bought. And I have to disagree with many of the critics who said he didn`t
do well. I thought he did spectacular, but he has changed the face of

This is a new era of political debates, 24 million people. You have
to look at this from a different perspective. It`s like watching "The
Apprentice" when we were getting 18 million to 20 million people. They`re
tuning in for Donald and there`s a different analysis and metrics that you
have to use.

CAPEHART: Sure. I mean, so you`re applying an analysis of reality

MANIGAULT: Not just reality.

CAPEHART: Which is entertainment with --

MANIGAULT: Let`s not just call it reality. Reality television has
now taken over television. People want to see real moments and see life
unfold in front of them, not scripted, real moments.

CAPEHART: On television. But a presidential debate -- yes, it`s on
television, but we`re talking about ten men standing on a stage who are on
television talking about how they`re going to lead the country and why
people in that audience and watching at home should vote for them for
president. It`s more than television.

MANIGAULT: What`s the question, Jonathan?

CAPEHART: So, the question is, do you think it`s a good thing or a
bad thing that reality television and the ethos there is bleeding into
presidential politics?

MANIGAULT: Bleeding into it. When you have a big reality TV star as
the front-runner for the Republican nomination, there`s no way to separate
it. This is the new reality. Donald Trump is the front-runner, and you
have to deal were thing that comes with it, his business side, him as a
father, him as a candidate.

And that`s what we`re dealing with, not just the TV or entertainment
side. He`s going to have to answer policy questions. He`s going to have
to give his position on serious issues. And he may also call people pigs.
But that`s part of the Trump thing that comes with the package.

CAPEHART: And you know what? Let`s roll back the most infamous
moment in that debate, the Megyn Kelly question.


MEGYN KELLY, FOX NEWS MODERATOR: You`ve called women you don`t like
fat pigs, dogs, slobs and disgusting animals. Your Twitter account --

TRUMP: Only Rosie O`Donnell.


MANIGAULT: That was pretty funny, you`ve got to admit.

CAPEHART: But was that appropriate?

MANIGAULT: Just because he insults Rosie O`Donnell doesn`t mean he
dislikes all women. I insulted Piers Morgan for five years, that doesn`t
mean I hate all Brits?

You have to understand the dynamic of celebrity feuds, honey. I made
a career out of celebrity feuds. Just because I insulted Janice Dickinson,
a supermodel, doesn`t mean I hate all supermodels. We are painting with a
broad brush that is way too broad for this moment. You`re making it way
too complicated. He`s selling the sizzle, not the steak. You`re getting
caught up on the sizzle.


CAPEHART: -- Michael Steele?


MANIGAULT: Can I just remind you that I also called the George W.
Bush candidacy as well. Are you serious? He had a problem pronouncing
basic words. Let`s not panic, folks. He became president. Did he have
problems pronouncing basic words?

CAPEHART: Sure. But he did not stand on stage running for president
calling someone out by name as a fat pig and then later on going on to
demean, belittle and denigrate the woman who asked the question, not just
one time, but several times over now two days.

MANIGAULT: I you want to get into this arena, and Michael and the
secretary will tell you this, you have to have a thick skin. That means
for the moderator, for the candidates, for journalists, no one is off

CAPEHART: I like to point out, I don`t think we`ve heard from Megyn
Kelly since she asked that question. But Donald Trump, talk about having a
thick skin, his skin is so thin, I could wallpaper my walls with it.

MANIGAULT: I disagree with that. You know what? He`s a human
being. I think because people have made him a caricature, they don`t think
that he has feelings. He`s a human being. He`s upset about something, he
expresses it, and that`s why people are connecting with him and his


STEELE: I just love all of this, I -- because -- well, because she`s
making the underlying fundamental point. Everybody is trying to figure out
why Donald Trump is having this kind of effect, why he hasn`t fallen off
the cliff yet.

And it`s because that authenticity, that realness, it`s connecting
with people. Over time this is -- the secretary said he`s running for
president. She`s absolutely right. Over time, as we get into the fall of
this campaign, that`s going to settle in with the electorate. That`s going
to settle in. When they start making the conscious choice as to who they
want, Republicans --

CAPEHART: They start getting serious.

STEELE: When they start really getting real serious about, OK, is
this person in the oval office to deal with Putin, to deal with ISIS, to
deal with all these big issues, then you`ll begin to see some of that set

But right now, he is connecting in an authentic and real way that is
throwing traditional political trappings --

CAPEHART: And so, wait --

MANIGAULT: Can we stop trying to write the Donald Trump political
obituary? He`s not going anywhere. He has staying power.

CAPEHART: And so, on that point and to what Michael Steele just
said, when people start focusing in on, do you want him in the Oval Office
negotiating with Vladimir Putin, given everything that you`ve just said
here today, would you vote for Donald Trump?

MANIGAULT: I`m a die hard Democrat, come on. I have Hillary Clinton
tattooed on my left arm.

ALLEN: Is that true?

MANIGAULT: No, it`s not true.


CAPEHART: Just made the point.

ALLEN: Because that`s some serious allegiance.


MANIGAULT: No, this is great for politics as a whole. I think it`s
great for politics as a whole.

To ask me if I would vote for him, I mean, I`m a journalist first and
foremost, but I`m also interested in watching this political process
unfold. He`s like the Tiger Woods of politician.

You know, when Tiger got involved with golf, people who had never
been watching or were involved or interested, they got engaged. That`s
what`s happening with this Trump candidacy. People just not interested in
the Republican Party politics, with all due respect --

STEELE: That`s true.

MANIGAULT: Now, they`re engaged.

STEELE: They`re engaged. She`s right. I mean, I`ve said it for a
while. There`s a disaffection amongst the base to the point of just anger,
frustration with the leadership, and he is that fresh air that`s come in
and said, OK, I`m willing to shake it up. But it will settle itself out.

CAPEHART: Omarosa, thank you for being here.

We`ll be right back.

MANIGAULT: Thank you, Jonathan.


CAPEHART: OK. So what`s going on here, you`re watching me, us at
home, do this show. Omarosa is doing a live Periscope to your followers on
Twitter. This is a part of modern technology that is just over my head.

MANIGAULT: You can follow me, too, too, @omarosa.

STEELE: This is how millennials communicate. This is how we
communicate in the future. And the political class needs to understand,
cut the TV ads, baby. This is where you need to be.


CAPEHART: Go right to Periscope.

MANIGAULT: This is why Donald Trump is winning. He`s got more
followers than all of the other candidates combined.

CAPEHART: And on that note, thank you to the panel this morning.
We`ve got to go.

Kathleen Sebelius, Michael Steele, Jonathan Allen, and Omarosa.

And thank you for getting UP with us today.

Join us tomorrow, Sunday morning at 8:00. My interview with Senator
Ben Cardin, reacting to the latest blow on the Iran nuclear deal from his
colleague, Chuck Schumer.

But before that, you`re going to want to watch "MELISSA HARRIS-
PERRY". That`s coming up next. Have a great Saturday.


<Copy: Content and programming copyright 2015 MSNBC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
Copyright 2015 Roll Call, Inc. All materials herein are protected by
United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed,
transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written
permission of Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark,
copyright or other notice from copies of the content.>

Rachel Maddow Show Section Front
Add Rachel Maddow Show headlines to your news reader:

Sponsored links

Resource guide