>> What you were just hearing
about, president Biden's trite
attempt to reduce pain at the
pump and the January 6
investigation all heating up to
discuss another busy week, we
turn to brooks and Capehart.
So good to see both of you.
There's a lot to talk about.
The Biden administration
rescinding this rule that was
handed down under president
trump.
That covid, we are in a
different place, this is the
humane thing to do is.
Is it the right thing to do?
>> There seems to be a
bipartisan agreement saying it
was put in place for covid
reasons.
There are 2 million times the
officials are accounting
immigrants trying to get in and
it's flooding the system.
There is a system in place if
they not get rid of 42 that they
will be able to have the
hearings and do all the stuff we
normally do with asylum-seekers.
As we just heard, it is a
gigantic political issue.
The 21% of Americans say
immigration is the highest.
Inflation is number one,
immigration is number two,
education and crime are number
three and four.
These are nightmare issues for
Democrats.
Republicans put up this large
fact sheet.
You see the ads writing
themselves.
The Republicans are going to go
to town on this.
>> Even some Democrats are
saying they think it's the wrong
thing.
>> What it points to is the lack
of a comprehensive overhaul.
Here's our proposal.
I had yet to hear what the
Republican puzzle is other than
fear mongering.
>> Build a wall.
>> It's a complicated moral
problem.
People are coming here not
because their lives are great
back home.
They are coming because
situations are deteriorating.
Some of them are genuinely in
horrific circumstances and one
leaps out to them.
Yet they are coming in such
large numbers, it's hard for us
to absorb all the people who
want to come.
They want to comfort economic
opportunity and we don't blame
them.
It takes a morally complicated
government or policy or
collective mind to say we're
going to help the people we are
capable of helping, how many are
we capable of helping and how do
we help them humanely and how do
we say sorry but do it humanely?
That kind of moral nuance is not
something we have seen a lot of.
>> Is made more complicated
because the party opposite the
president instead of lending a
hand is hurling bats and not
part of the solution.
The only would we get to this
nirvana is if the Republican
party wanted to be a true
negotiating partner wanted to
get something done.
>> Another hot issue that
surfaced this week, something
the president announced
yesterday, yes the job numbers
are looking good but the
administration is still very
worried about inflation.
Roy about the price of gas.
He announced he is going to
release barrels from the
strategic petroleum reserve to
try to get gas prices down a
little bit.
Is this a good move at this
moment?
>> It's hard to know.
Presidents always release from
the reserve and it never works.
Joe Biden to his credit this
release is bigger than any
president has done.
They are trying to dump stuff on
the market and they are saying
it may produce 10% to 20% gain
per gallon at the pump.
That would have some effect.
That is far from certain.
When we released from the
reserve, the markets think they
are releasing now but they have
to put it back so the markets
can think long term and think
that's not going to reduce
demand.
Second, OPEC could say we want
to keep prices up.
We will limit our supply for a
little while.
There are plenty of other actors
who have the chance to mess with
our plans.
I remain I guess guardedly
skeptical.
That this is going to do much
for the people who are paying to
pay -- to fill up their tank.
>> The key thing you said is
markets think long term but
presidents think -- they try to
-- when presidents go to the
strategic reserve, this is
short-term thinking.
There is short-term pain that
the president has to deal with.
The reports I saw showed that
this release could lead to $.10
per gallon up to $.35 per gallon
for consumers.
When you are a consumer and you
are saving $.10, that adds up.
Gas prices, they are the one
thing that consumers feel
immediately.
If you are the white house
looking at tough economic news
and the people are angry about
inflation and everything, if can
give them something where they
are saving in the short term,
you will go with it.
The market does think long term.
It thinks they are releasing
that, but they will have to buy
it back.
Administrations always do this.
I think it's the right thing to
do for their political calculus.
>> They are saying it's for six
months.
Do you think this is going to
matter in the elections this
year?
>> Absolutely.
You drive down the street, I'm
in California it's like whoa.
It's going to matter.
The better policy, Barack Obama
and Paul Ryan did a deal where
the increased production which
Republicans wanted lightning
regulations on producers, but in
exchange money for green
producers.
That sounds like a good idea,
but it won't help Joe Biden
between now and November.
>> Do you think it helps
Democrats at all between now and
>> What he was just talking
about?
It's long-term.
In the short-term, no it's not
meant to help.
I think the spr that will help.
>>He January 6 committee, two
developments this week.
There's a 7.5 hour gap in the
phone records from the white
house.
The committee is still figuring
out what that's all about.
Whether it was deliberate or an
accident we will see.
The other is the members of the
committee, I ended up talking to
two of them this week.
They were more openly critical
of the justice department for
not picking this up and running
with it.
Moving toward some kind of
prosecution of people like mark
does.
One said to me yesterday what he
did was completely lawless.
>> First on the gap, it sparked
a lot of conspiracies.
Is he using a burner phone
secretly?
I think CNN seems to have the
most plausible explanation which
is the record-keeping and the
trump administration is not
always meticulous which I know
is a shocker.
Apparently, when he went into
the oval office, he did use the
white house phone system and it
wasn't recorded.
That could be it, just bad
record keepers.
It is weird that happened to be
at a crucial moment on January
6.
To be honest, I trust Merrick
Garland.
The political players are
political players and they have
no incentive to be balanced.
Merrick Garland has an incentive
to be like prosecutor.
There have been questionable
things that have been done, but
the trump administration does us
a favor by doing their
questionable things out in the
open.
I haven't seen anything that
makes it look like hit gigantic
scandal.
If that call or message exists,
we are in a whole new ballgame.
It's easy for people to get
excited that got something and
get over politicized about it.
Right now, my trust is in the
justice department.
>> When it comes to the attorney
general, what chairmanship and
others, they are upset over the
contempt charges, they are
valid.
They are sitting at doj and no
one knows what's happening in
terms of prosecution.
Where I agree on the trust of
Merrick Garland is the call from
Democrats and folks on the left
for doj to investigate Donald
Trump.
These are two separate things.
When it comes to investigating
the former president, I was
about to say it would be insane
if Merrick Garland telegraphed
that this was happening before
he had all of the eyes dotted
and tees crossed.
There lots of prosecutors on
television who keep saying the
same thing.
They trust her Garland.
At some point, that trust is
going to erode.
Now when it comes to the
contempt charges, I say what are
you doing?
When it comes to the overall
issue of should Donald Trump be
investigated, I'm willing to
wait because I want doj I want
the attorney general to be as
careful as possible to make his
case as bulletproof as possible
if there is one so it doesn't
make things worse by falling
apart.
>> The focus right now seems to
be more does, but we will see.