tv All In With Chris Hayes MSNBC October 1, 2019 5:00pm-6:00pm PDT
american people are ready as a proud people to stand up to him. that's "hardball" for now. thanks for being with us tonight. "all in" with chris hayes starts right now. tonight on "all in." >> what do you know about those conversations? >> the first big showdown of the impeachment era. >> so you just gave me a report about a i think whistleblower complaint, none of which i've seen. >> tient why democrats are accusing the secretary of state of trying to stone wall and obstruct the inquiry. then -- >> is it time to dare i say lock him up? >> new alarms over the justice department and the state department investigating the president's enemies. >> we have found many crimes on the other side. >> then new evidence republicans may be misjudging the politics of impeachment. >> trump should come out and say you want to impeach me, knock yourselves out. >> and my exclusive interview.
"all in" starts right now. good evening from new york. i'm chris hayes. it has only been a week since speaker of the house nancy pelosi announced an official and informal impeachment inquiry to donald trump. and since then things have been moving at a blistering pace. but the basic facts are not changed, the president corruptly abused his office to coerce a foreign state to come up with dirt against a political rival and then he and his white house tried to cover it up. it is just one instance of a president using the entire machinery of our government to his ends. exclusively with no regard whatsoever to public interest or the national interest, and that is what the scandal of donald trump writ large is really. that is what secretary of state mike pompeo is trying to do at the state department. it is lest i have to say this, not mike pompeo's state department. it's not donald trump's state department. it is our state department.
today pompeo pushed back on house democrats demand to interview key state department officials as early as this week calling it an act of intimidation. but his efforts to stone wall the impeachment inquiry are already crumbling. just a few hours ago we learned the former special envoy to ukraine will testify in the impeachment inquiry on thursday two days from now. he resigned his post. he's nout alone. the former ambassador to ukraine, the woman who trump seemed to threaten menacingly in his conversation with the ukrainian president will also testify before the house committees next week. mike pompeo coming out today and telling house democrats the state department will not show up for impeachment hearings because we now know mike pompeo was reportedly on that same ukraine call with president zelensky. but remember this is how he reacted when asked about it
exactly a week ago. >> "the wall street journal" is reporting that president trump pressed the president of ukraine eight times to work with rudy giuliani to investigate joe biden's son. what do you know about those conversations? >> so you just gave me a report about a i think whistleblower complaint, none of which i've seen. >> that wasn't the question though, right? she's asking what do you know about those conversations. he was on the call so he knew about the conversation. that was a week ago. here's how pompeo reacted just five days ago. >> i haven't had a chance to actually read the whistleblower complaint yet. i read the first couple of pa paraphernali paragraphs and then got busy today. if i understand it right it's from someone who had secondhand knowledge. >> as the president is fond of saying west point, harvard, the whole thing.
he could probably read the whistleblower complaint pretty quickly. of course that is immaterial because he was listening to the phone call at issue. invitation, in fact even a threat to menace and to meddle in american elections. you heard the president disparage and vaguely threaten the u.s. ambassador to ukraine, a career foreign service officer who apparently wouldn't play ball with rudy giuliani's ongoing insane conspiracy theory and who's now planning to testify before congress. this is the same mike pompeo whose state department appeared to be up in its neck colluding for the sole purpose of extorting dirt from a foreign entity, that mike pompeo. the same mike pompeo whose state department has launched this utterly insane inquiry into the former secretary of state and yes, this is what i'm talking about, hillary clinton's former aids and their e-mails. you heard that right three years
after the fact. they're now looking into as many 130 members of the state department after announce that they have in 2019 ret row actively classified things they sent to hillary clinton which could now constitute potential security violation. yes, no, you're not crazy. that is what i said. the state department officials said things that the time not classified. three years later the trump administration came in and classified those things, and all those people one of whom we're going to hear from in a little bit are now under state department investigation. that mike pompeo. like mike pence and attorney general william barr is up to his eyeballs in all of this. speak of barr the scandal unfolding at the department of justice, the attorney general has apparently been flying across the globe basically trying to dig up ammo for trump tv. what he runs is our department of justice, a department of justice tasked with enforcing the law for all of us. william barr should be investigating the actions of the
president, not spending taxpayer money to undermine american intelligence services because keep in mind we know president trump has already done just that. it was just four days ago "the washington post" reported that president trump told two senior russian officials in that infamous 2017 oval office meeting that he was unconcerned -- unconcerned about moskow's interference in the 2016 presidential election because the united states did the same to other countries. in other words, have at it, boys. it is a stunning breach of public trust by a president of the united states, a breach that undercuts american intelligence, law enforcement, a violation of the most sacrosanct duty the president has. joining me now for more on the trump administration's attempt to stone wall the hearing, a member of the house foreign affairs committee which is where those state department officials are scheduled to appear fordes. and he also served most recently in the state department under barack obama as an cystitant secretary of state for democracy
and human rights. you're uniquely situated to evaluate the various equities because you've worked at state and now a member of congress. so when mike pompeo says how dare you try to bully the people of foggy bottom and i will stand up to their integrity and you can't talk to them and you're a member of congress, what do you say? >> he's been bullying the people of foggy bottom since he got there and the president has as well. look, what these people cannot stand is that there are still patriotic folks working for the u.s. government who believe their job is to work for america, not for a president, not for a person but for the country who have taken that oath. and what he's learning i think this week is that the oath keepers at the state department are going to stand up to the oath breakers. >> it's striking to me kirk volker is going to testify, and maria who is the ambassador and
lifelong foreign service working is going to come testify even though mike pompeo said she wasn't going to. >> well, he can't tell her not to testify. what's he going to do, run her out of the foreign service? he can't do that. the president threw her under the bus in the most threatening possible way. they yanked her from ukraine because they were running a foreign shadow policy through rudy giuliani who is maybe the president's lawyer. and now they expect her to somehow be respectful of this scheme and listen to the secretary of state? of course not. so these folks will testify. secretary pompeo will fail in his efforts to intimidate them, and we'll know even more about something we already know a lot about. >> so you're confident that for all the bluster embodied in pompeo's letter he will not be ultimately successful in stopping your committee and other committees? >> and sense fear more than bluster. this is the rare investigation in which we already know most of the facts.
before we even begin we're filling in a few details about maybe the circumstances under which the aid was cut off to threaten the ukrainians, presumably to cough up this dirt. but they admit today the central fact that the president tried to extort election help from a foreign leader. we know this. and, you know, we still have to go through the process because even if you're caught red-handed in america robbing a bank, you are going to still have a trial and have testimony and a xi and give you a chance to defend yourself because that's what this is. >> there's an announcement today which caught my eye and you may or may not know anything about this. multiple congressional sources confirming that the state department office of the inspector general has reached out to congress tomorrow with an urgent request to brief staff tomorrow on documents related to the state department of ukraine. does that happen a lot? >> no, it's really interesting. i have no idea what it's about. we'll see over the next few
days. but again it's really interesting how the inspectors general at these different agencies are playing this role of establishing tracks against presidential authority. again, what the president is trying to do big picture is free himself from all of the bounds of ethics and morality and law. and to get rid of all of the referees, the intelligence community, the fbi, the press. and what's standing up to them right now, inspector generals at, you know, the intelligence community, the state department, other agencies who are saying, no, we took an oath to the constitution not to the president. . we're going to keep our oath. >> final question you're a fresh member of congress, you repeat a district that had been represented by a republican and had sent republicans to grs i think for many years. are you confident now home for these two weeks that you can explain why you support an impeachment inquiry and what house democrats are doing?
>> oh, absolutely. >> you jumped to that question. >> i ran -- i made two basic promises. i'm going to fight for the interests of the people of new jersey. we need a hudson river tunnel. we need to get back to state and local tax deductions, we need better health care. but i also promise to stand up for the constitution and people voted for me on that basis and this is something my goodness, everybody can understand. no president should use our foreign policy to extort election help from foreign countries, not republican, not democrat. if we allow this to happen, if we base our foreign policy on whether foreign leaders will help a president win re-election what are we going to do, give a better trade deal to china because they give trump dirt on pete buttigieg? it's crazy. >> it's crazy although now they bring it up it doesn't seem see crazy. joining me now for more on the
trump administration's lawless behavior maya wily, now vice president for social justice and the former cabinet secretary under barack obama as well as former counsel to the house oversight committee. starting on one of the things congress just said which is really important here when we talk about a central figure in this and i like many reporters are trying to get dirt in the last week as you can imagine, there are civil service protectants and the amount of bullying and fealty to the man at the top that is so sort of cringe inducingly manifested by people like mike pompeo and bill barr is not necessarily the case for the folks in the career offices. >> yeah, and i think one of the things that was so important what the congress member said is that this fundamentally is about whether there are checks and balances that is about whether these agencies, these career staff whose jobs are essentially
to serve the interests of the american people are able to do that without the power of the presidency being used to tell them not to. and one of the things that happened with maria which i know is really important in the whistleblower complaint that the state department itself stood up and said, yeah, that's not true was the allegation that she -- which got her terminated essentially was that she had created a list of people who should not be investigated. and it was the state department actually that said that's just not true. >> right. that defended her -- >> that defended her, and yet she was recalled from ukraine, and she was a careerist, had served both democratic and republican administrations and that's actually what we need in diplomacy is the consistency, the history, the professionalism and the service of country not
of party. >> that, i mean the fundamental thing you see in the phone call is that the president -- there's no discussion of american foreign policy in ukraine whatsoever, of the national interest. in fact zelensky tries to bring it up and say we'd love to sell you some oil and the president has no time for it. the fundamental inability almost as a conceptual matter. >> it is now a fundamental part of u.s. foreign policy to go chase down conspiracy theories and to dig up dirt on political allies. and for me it always harkens back to watergate. you look at article 1, article 2 of watergate and it talks about misusing federal agencies and we see the obstruction of justice in article 3 playing out here as well. and the irony for all of this is
mike pompeo getting up there and attacking the whistle-blower and saying this is just secondhand information. you want to know who has first-hand information, that'll be mike pompeo and he won't testify. >> in fact in response from those committee chairs they say you're a fact witness in this. because we know you were on the call you should have nothing to do with who does and does not come to talk to us. >> he is conflicted. >> by definition. >> by definition. but remember this is absolutely right, this is obstruction of congress. preventing congressional oversight which is constitutional power of congress is also an impeachable offense, and this is obstruction of congress. >> it's interesting you say that because you can see -- i mean when you listen to the congressman about oh, they're going to get the information, the difference in both the kind of legal regime we're operating under since the announcement of the formal impeachment inquiry and the locus of power where this administration was getting
away with a lot of stone walling, tying things up in litigation, that's not happening anymore. explain to me why is it not happening? >> to the extent these things ever get played out in courts, congress is under better grounds when operating under impeachment power. that being said i know nancy pelosi wants to focus on this specific incident it'll include not only this, the mueller report, the tax return, wilbur ross and this is part of a broader pattern of this administration's stone walling and that simply can't stand. >> go ahead. >> i was just going to add to that that congressman actually provided part of the explanation which i think is important to underscore and that is this is case on this particular issue where the facts are already out in the public. it's already as far as i can tell impeachable right now. they don't actually need a lot of additional information to say we've got -- on this one we've
got the articles. >> again, that's what keeps driving are this is how red-handed they were caught in the commission of the act and the house sort of laying the attempts to sort of -- >> they admitted it. >> right, admitted it. >> chris, go back to watergate. richard nixon held onto that smoking gun tape. when it finally came out he had to resign eight days later. this group of people turned over the transcript because they thought it exonerated them. so it's all out there and the president has confirmed all of it. >> thank you both. coming up the growing concern about the president co-opting the justice and state department to investigate his political enemies. the latest in two minutes. political enemies. the latest in two minutes. of doing great work. where an american icon uses the latest hr tools to stay true to the family recipe. where a music studio spends less time on hr and payroll, and more time crafting that perfect sound. where the nation's biggest party store can staff up quickly as soon as it's time for fun. this is the world of adp.
that could allow hackers devices into your home.ys and like all doors, they're safer when locked. that's why you need xfinity xfi. with the xfi gateway, devices connected to your homes wifi are protected. which helps keep people outside from accessing your passwords, credit cards and cameras. and people inside from accidentally visiting sites that aren't secure. and if someone trys we'll let you know. xfi advanced security. if it's connected, it's protected. call, click, or visit a store today. when attorney general billium bar came before the senate judiciary committee back in may he was able to bat many of the questions away. there was one moment where he simmed pinned. it was when senator kamala harris asked him this.
>> attorney general bar wrpg has the president or anyone at the white house ever asked or suggested you open an investigation? >> i wouldn't -- i wouldn't -- >> yes or no? >> the president or anybody else? >> it seems you'd remember something like that and be able to tell us. >> yeah, but i'm trying to grapple with the word suggest. i mean there had been discussion of matters out there that they've not asked me to open an investigation. >> perhaps they suggested. >> i don't know, i wouldn't say suggest. >> hinted? >> i don't know. >> i don't know, just kind of it was sort of in the air. we were just brainstorming together and you lose track of who says what. we do know actually according to "the washington post" that barr held private meetings oesh seas with foreign intelligence officials seeking their help into a justice department inquiry that president trump hopes will discredit between
russia and members of the trump campaign during the 2016 election. in other words, it appears the attorney general was and is hard at work helping the president prop up a disproved conspiracy theory for political gain. and that is the reason why an exchange, there's a principle within the rule of law that investigations have to be initiated because of some factual predicate, because there's some reason to believe there's wrongdoing and they are not and cannot be a reason of tool for those in power to punish political enemies or dissidents. and that's the way it works in tons of places, russia, turkey, other places. it's not they show up to your house in the middle of the night, no they show up and serve you a warrant and say your finances are being looked into. gyming up reasons to investigate political enemies is the hall park. and this isn't even a controversial opinion, he said it publicly.
donald trump believes it's his right to order investigations into anything. me spent all of jeff session's term as attorney general tweeting about what and who to investigate. the current attorney general william barr seems to be going along with it. the attorney general of the united states must be an independent guarantor of some foreign vehicle to justice that does not submit to the political wlems of the man in power. but william barr appears to have been corrupted and that is the true danger here. i'm joined by michael, now a senior fellow for the center of american progress. someone who worked in government particularly in foreign policy watching attorney general explicitly requesting the president according to reporting put him in touch to foreign, talk to foreign heads of state about this russia gate counter mueller report investigation. how common is something like
that? >> not common at all, chris. and it's really hard to overstate just how concerning it is to see the president of the united states and then along with him the attorney general of the united states, the top law enforcement officer of our country using those close alliance relationships and those close intelligence sharing relationships around the world to further the president's own personal political agenda and of course trying to discredit in the same breath the work of our own intelligence agencies. again, it's hard to overstate just how concerning this is and how unprecedented it is but it's clear as the days go by now and we see the drip, drip, drip of more things coming out just the extent to which this president is using the united states government as his own personal foreign policy implementer. >> you know, there's an argument i guess to be made that it's perfectly legitimate to have an
investigation where you sort of look interior to the house about what happened in 2016 and mueller and john durham who has been assigned to this is very well respected individual in the legal world. what do you say to the people who say, look, you've got to trust this is all on the level and this is legit? >> i say there have been numerous investigations that are looked into this over the last handful of years and come up with of course nothing that would make you believe any of what you see, some of the critic out there talking about, and we have a 448-page report from former fbi director robert mueller going into pain staking detail about exactly why and how he went about his investigation. and so i think we have it right there in black and white, 448 pages. >> there's another place in which we're seeing what appears to me a kind of punitive investigation, that's in the state department where you used
to work. i've read this story now three times and i just can't make sense of it. it seems so obviously nuts to me, so help me with it. the idea that the state department is now investigating e-mail practices of people hillary clinton e-mailed with in the state and it's because they retroactively e-mailed, the e-mailed of subjects not considered classified at the time but in or are being retroactively marked as classified and then looking at 138 people you want among them or caught up in this drag net, what is going on? >> chris, this is again the story is just another piece of this broader trend, broader pattern that we've seen from president trump. that's one of the biggest things i think we're learning about in recent weeks. it's the attorney general of the united states. it's the secretary of state not only of course with this story but numerous other incidents over the past few years with
secretary pompeo and his predecessor, secretary tillerson of going after and trying to go after state department officials, career officials, civil service officers, foreign service officers for no reason other than they were believed to have worked in the department at the same time as the previous administration. and so, again, just using these career officials in some cases ruining their careers all for political retribution. >> all right, michael, thanks for being with me tonight. >> thank you, chris. >> tonight as the impeachment inquiry moves forward there's some curious movement on the fight to get the president's tax returns. and also the news from the southern district of new york after this. om the southern district of new yk or after this ♪
but allstate helps you. with drivewise. feedback that helps you drive safer. and that can lower your cost now that you know the truth... are you in good hands? plants capture co2. what if other kinds of plants captured it too? if these industrial plants had technology that captured carbon like trees we could help lower emissions. carbon capture is important technology - and experts agree. that's why we're working on ways to improve it. so plants... can be a little more... like plants. ♪
in the background of the current impeachment fight there's a continued ongoing effort to get donald trump's tax returns remember those? part of our government has filed a brief letter to the judge saying they plan on joining the president's private lawyers efforts to stone wall and keep those taxes secret. i should tell you the actual brief comes out tomorrow. former sdny prosecutor and media analyst mimiroca says she's holding out hope there's more to this than appears. she's with us now. i saw this yesterday and didn't really understand it. there's litigation, this has to do with cy vance's efforts to get the president's tax returns and he's the manhattan district
attorney. >> a criminal inquiry of not just trump, it appears to be of the trump organization and the hush money i mean this is important to keep in mind. in other words, he's investigating other people. so any attempt to stop him from getting the tax returns is not just stopping a legitimate investigation that may implicate trump but other people involved in a criminal scheme. >> so he has subpoena and the president's lawyers immediately filed to basically block it, right? >> correct. they file a suit in federal court aas opposed to moving to quash the subpoena in state court which would be the more normal way of dealing with this. so they smartly i mean if you think it's smart to be craftily like this are trying to get it into federal court. as opposed to dealing with a new york state court judge. >> and that's where they've been
doing all their fighting on all this stuff. the house subpoena, and there's three different fronts i think they're fighting on right now. >> yeah, i mean they're really trying to keep these tax returns for us. >> and then the southern district of new york says what? >> so they file a letter first just saying i think sort of the day before the subpoena was due to be returned meaning the documents had to be turned over in state court, the southern district came in and said, well, we might want to join in their president trump's lawsuit, so hold up, give us some time frankly the judge could have said you've known about this, why are you coming in at the last hour here? but he didn't, he gave them until i think yesterday or was it today to say what they were doing. and so now they've said, yes, we are joining -- we the southern district of new york are going to join in some way the
president's personal lawsuit to stop this. >> that sounds -- is that as weird as it sounds? >> it is quite weird, yes. and look, i do want to say i want to see what the brief says tomorrow. right now what we know is that trump's lawyer's basis for trying to stop this is saying something really outrageous. they are saying the president not only can't be prosecuted in the federal system, which again is a doj policy, they're saying he can't be investigated or prosecuted at all, anywhere, federal or state system. that is taking this to a whole new level. and by the way they're also impeding the congressional investigation so that would mean there's absolutely -- >> they're saying congress can't have this stuff even though there's both law and constitutional basis to think the congress can't investigate the president. they're saying no, you can't do that. but also any authority with criminal investigatory power
whether state or local not only cannot indict the president, but cannot investigate him, meaning no one can. that is the official position of the president's lawyersmism. >> that is. so now the question is is that really the position of the department of justice and my old office, the southern district of new york? that's why i was saying i was holding out hope. i was hoping there's some procedure argument they were going to make tomorrow that would make this not quite as horrible, but now if that's the argument, if that's the substantive argument that they join, that would be very disappointing and will tomorrow signal that bill barr has sort of take v over the last bastion of independence in the department of justice which is the southern district. >> we're going to look for that actual filing tomorrow and we're going to get you back. thank you for being here. next, the public support for impeachment on the rise, the president's approval rating dropping in key states. a look at the political calculations republicans are making after this. litical calculations republicans are making after this. >> vo: so when my windshield broke... i found the experts at safelite autoglass.
they have exclusive technology and service i can trust. >> singers: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace. ♪ should always be working harder. that's why your cash automatically goes into a money market fund when you open a new account. just another reminder of the value you'll find at fidelity. open an account today.
but super poligrip gives him a tight seal. snacking can mean that pieces get stuck under mike's denture. to help block out food particles. so he can enjoy the game. super poligrip. here's the thing about managing for your business.s when you've got public clouds, and private clouds, and hybrid clouds- things can get a bit cloudy for you. but now, there's the dell technologies cloud, powered by vmware. a single hub for a consistent operating experience across all your clouds. that should clear things up.
momentum among voters is moving towards impeachment and last week there's been a big jump in public support for impeachic the president. the majority support for an impeachment inquiry. there's all this bravado around what's happening with impeachment. they're saying it, bring it. many of the ones that are have already announced they're retiring but basically house republicans don't really care. nagt they're probably anxious to
have the fight because they're in safe seats anyway, but it is in a different senate which of course where the trial will be held. he's under water by five points, that's the state where republican martha mcsally will pea running to keep her senate seat next year. in maine, under water by 13 points where susan collins is already among democrats top to flip the senate seat. and in colorado where the president is under water by 15 points. and cory gardener is another republican senator up in 2020. those republican senators are facing a very real chance they're going to have to vote to say yes, it was fine the president attempted to use american foreign policy to coerce a foreign power to investigate his political rival. believe me, it's not a vote they want to take. here to talk with me -- and i'll start with you as a professor of
political science. i think mitch mcconnell cares about one thing which is staying the majority leader of the united states senate. and that depends on keeping people like cory gardener and susan collins and martha mcsally. and i think he's a savvy enough political operator to understand if he could make this go away, he would. >> it's funny because we talked about public opinion today in class and we talked about these very numbers. this is the bind republicans finds them in. they have cast their lot with donald trump, shown them time and time again they will support this particular president. and also on the wrong side of "the list"ry. this is slightly different, though, because, a, all politics is local. b, if they lose their seat to democrats obviously they know the balance of the senate goes in a totally different direction, and there goes donald trump's presidency, let's just say he gets elected for a second-term and mitch mcconnell on the one hand is dealing with a very erratic leader, his leader is erratic so he's saying everything is fine so make sure
we hold the tide. more and more republicans, we know donald trump's base is not going nowhere. it does not matter what he has said or done. but there are some republicans who do feel like this may be a bridge too far. we keep saying when does the dam break? when do republicans just have way too much? this actually may be the case where you are admitting that you have talked to foreign powers. some possibly are adversaries and ask them to interfere enamerican democracy, and this may be an opportunity for some republican tuesday realize that for the sake of democracy not for the sake of a man running an autocracy right now, they need to step up and make sure they hold the tide. >> john, you have reported on politics in washington for a very long time. and i wonder your sense in reporting on this, the great piece sort of knocking down the more nonsensical reputations
that have been thrown about here, that there is an understanding among republican leaders if not the white house that there's genuine political danger here. >> absolutely there's genuine political danger and i think professor greer is right about you can't expect or assume that republicans are going to break off in significant numbers, but you can't dismiss the possibility either. we had a poll came out that showed 16% of republicans supporting an impeachment inquiry 23% in a cbs poll over the weekend. those are significant numbers for a president who has had only single digit opposition from within his party. this is case where unlike with the mueller report there isn't even a veneer of plausible denieblt about what happened. we have the transcript of his words which tracked the whistle-blower complaint. that's a difficult fact pattern. it's why so many senators when reporters approach them in the hallway, they turn the other direction and say i haven't read
it, i don't know, and once you switch the switch and they lose the ability to dodge this issue altogether, they have to take a vote on it. >> that's a great point, they can run away from reporters in the halls and talk around the issue, but eventually if in fact he's impeached, it goes to the senate you're going to have to vote one way or another. there's also the rhetoric coming from the white house. i mean, in the past week the president has called for adam schiff to be charged with fraud, had to be arrested for treason. he's demanded schiff be investigated. he's called people who helped the whistleblower almost a spy and implied back in the old days they would be hanged or executed, right, what we did for treason. just tonight he's saying i'm coming to the conclusion it is a clue intended to take away power. i guess the question is how much of this kind of rhetoric should
we be worried about or how much is the ravings of someone who's essentially impotent in this whole process? >> we should have been worried when he came down the escalator you called mexican trade -- >> but he's a president now which is big difference. >> there is a fundamental difference and he's been supported by -- as i've always said on this show he's always been supported by the republican party and said well that's just him. but i think some of these senators are also looking -- anyone who's been in donald trump's orbit has not landed well, right? either they're in prison, unemployed, unemployable or heading to prison. and so certain senators have to realize at a certain point in time they have to get off this titanic and save the democracy. >> i also wonder if they know how much this rhetoric is going to escalate, arrest for treason, it's a coup, civil war. all these gnarly tropes of
violent resistance the president seems to be cultivating. >> more importantly their constituents, especially those suburban constituents led by women who have drifted over towards the democrats. i was down as i think you were, chris, at the texas tripune festival and had a conversation with jeff flake, the former republican senator and he was widely quoted as saying there are 35 republicans who would vote to convict trump if there were a secret ballot. but he also told me something interesting which is if you start to get a small critical mass which shows the willingness to break away and a vote to convict, if you've got four or five or six that's when the thing could open up and you get some of these senators in vulnerable states, arizona, maine, colorado, you mentioned. but if you get those, break those loose then you have the
potential of a larger number going along. >> thank you both. still to come my exclusive interview on his new book, we'll be here at the desk just ahead. l be here at the desk just ahead with my hepatitis c, i felt i couldn't be at my best for my family. in only 8 weeks with mavyret, i was cured and left those doubts behind. i faced reminders of my hep c every day. but in only 8 weeks with mavyret, i was cured. even hanging with friends i worried about my hep c. but in only 8 weeks with mavyret, i was cured. mavyret is the only 8-week cure for all common types of hep c. before starting mavyret your doctor will test if you've had hepatitis b which may flare up and cause serious liver problems during and after treatment. tell your doctor if you've had hepatitis b, a liver or kidney transplant, other liver problems, hiv-1, or other medical conditions, and all medicines you take including herbal supplements. don't take mavyret with atazanavir or rifampin, or if you've had certain liver problems. common side effects include headache and tiredness. with hep c behind me, i feel free...
...fearless... ...and there's no looking back, because i am cured. talk to your doctor about mavyret. a few months back on my podcast why is this happening i talked to david wallace about his book. and more specifically the ways in which the climate crisis will increasingly be the all come compass background in how we view everything of the world. and i've been thinking about that ever since, that climate isn't just an issue or set of policies but it's the developing condition of our lives at this moment and how naturally that means how we as a culture are going to have to sort of represent the crisis in our art, in our tv, our movies, our books. and that's why i'm so excited for the conversation that i'm going to have at our live with
pod tour event in los angeles in just a few weeks because there i'm going to talk to the great adam mckay, one time snl writer and now screen director who specializes in taking complex moments of history and transforming them into cinematic art. in the bush shany years in vice and adam is also obsessed with the climate crisis and thinking about how to produce works of tv and film about it. adam and i will also be joined by a brill i want author who wrote one of my favorite works of fiction in the last few years. if you can get it and read it, you should. it's set in a the new future in which u.s. southern states have seceded it's beautiful and haunting and informed my imagination both dark and bright about our climate future. together we're going to be on stage monday, october 21st discussing all this as a special
addition of why is this happening. really loorking f really looking forward to it. if you're in the los angeles area you should be a part of the experience. search chris hayes or find the link on our website msnbc.com/with pod tour. get your tickets now. i hope to see you there. your tiw i hope to see you there. do you have concerns about mild memory loss related to aging? prevagen is the number one pharmacist-recommended memory support brand. you can find it in the vitamin aisle in stores everywhere. prevagen. healthier brain. better life.
for more than 20 years, oprah's book club was this kind of social and literary phenomenon. it basically transformed american publishing entirely. now it's back. the book oprah winfrey has picked for the relaunch is the novel "the water dancer" by ta-nehisi coates. joining me now is national book award winner, author of "the water dancer," ta-nehisi coates. how are you feeling? >> i'm all right.
week seven, likives tellie ive you. >> you and i had talked about this book for years because it has been in process for years. when did you know you wanted to write fiction, a novel as opposed to an essay? >> fantasies, i always loved e.l. doctorow, i had fantasies but i didn't think it was possible. fiction looks like magic. >> it really does, it's like, a human can do that? >> you train for it. but what i quickly realized, it's a lot of work. after i finished my first book, my agent was like, we think you should try this. and it took ten years. >> is there a mental switchover
from writing an essay to being in the world of fiction? >> yes. the fiction feels more closed off than nonfiction. >> from the world? >> yeah. i am operating in the world of chris hayes, it's a mutual sort of thing. whereas in fiction, it's just your world. even though it's slavery, it's your slavery. you've painted certain things, certain ways of being among the characters. it's a much more closed-off space, i would say. it's like going in a room and shutting the door. which is sort of cool, actually. >> i imagine there's something liberating about that. >> extremely. >> the book is incredible, i got to read it a few weeks ago, and then i read the book about frederick douglass which is fantastic. i was thinking about your book and the research that went into it. the book is about slavery, his life, world, his journey to freedom. how much research was there, how
much were you trying to sort of like figure out how to conjure that world? >> it was a time. i read a bunch of primary documents, narratives, books written by enslaved people or freed people. i went to a bunch of plantations, went to monticello, went to montpeliemontpelier, we whitney plantation in new orleans, which is outside of new orleans. yeah, quite a bit. >> did the physical bearing of being in those locations, because there's these long descriptions of what the plantation is like. >> right. >> did that transform the way that you thought about the world? >> yes. yes. and the descriptions are almost entirely inspired by monticello, montpelier. there's a lot of jefferson, jefferson crossed with frederick douglass sort of thing. it was a lot. it was a lot. without the historians and the
archeologists, there's no way i could have wrote that book. >> one thing i hadn't thought of a lot, i think, which is the paradox for the slave, which is that the diminished economic prospects of the master spell uncertainty and possibly a worse fate, to be sold down the river, to the deep south, maryland or mississippi. you're so bound to this master that them encountering economic ruin can be a terrible thing for you because it means things are going to get worse for your life. >> and jefferson is the stereotypical case of this. you have a guy, for all his brilliance, he was a bad businessman, like drinking really expensive wines, and when he dies, he's in deeply in debt. they sell the people on the lawn
at monticello to pay or the debts. >> for one too many bottles of wine. >> exactly. monticello, where they built it, it's like bad farming land, there's no water to get to it. it was a terrible idea. but he had this vision of being up on a hill, which in itself is a metaphor. >> another thing in the book that really stuck with me is the way the plantation operates in a slave society, the slaves don't just do all the nature, they have all the knowledge. the place entirely depends on not just the slaves' backs and muscles but they actually understand when things have to be planted and when things have to happen. >> jefferson often wasn't there. >> right. an absentee landlord, essentially. >> he was completely absent. the huge marble columns, i don't
know what they're made of but these huge columns outside of monticello, and this enslaved man named jupiter cut the columns. they don't know how he did it, even now, they have no idea how he did it. i was trying to get across in the book, enslavement isn't just enslavement of the body, run over there and pick cotton. it's the enslavement of the mind. jefferson had one slave trained as a cook to make sure he could have have all these fine delicacies he enjoyed. >> there's the quote about northern migration when you say, what binds these stories together was the back against the wall, reluctant yet hopeful search for something better, any place but where they were. they did what human beings looking for freedom have often
done, they left. i thought about that quote, about your book, and that moment when we see people doing everything they can at the greatest peril to show up at the border with their 9-year-old, maybe even drowning in the river. >> linking to the news today, i really did not realize this until about january or february or so. family separation, destruction of families is a huge theme in the book. and i was thinking it's really coincidental that this is happening in policy right now. but in fact this is what you do to people you despise, period. you make war upon their families. this is typical in american history. this didn't end with enslavement for black folks. and so i don't think it's a mistake that trump in all of his despising, you know, of immigrants on the border, is taking it out on the children. i don't think that's coincidental. >> the book is called "the water dancer," it's a beautiful, it's a great read by ta-nehisi
coates, a great novel. thank you for taking time on the tour. "the rachel maddow show" starts right now. thanks to you at home for joining us this hour. as has been the case over the past week, the news again today seems to be developing by the hour. this has been a remarkable news day. there's a lot to get to tonight. let's jump right in. i want to start with the surprise news that i think nobody saw coming until it happened late this afternoon. it's news from the state department. late this afternoon, there was an unexpected announcement from a number of committees in congress that they had been alerted by the long time inspector general from the state department that he believed he needed to come talk to them immediately. the inspector general of the state department. it's a man named steve linnick. he's been there several year