tv All In With Chris Hayes MSNBC January 20, 2017 12:00am-1:01am PST
to want on "all in," hours from now, trump becomes president and assumes all the duties of that office. >> wha nuclear capabilities. >> tonight, new reporting on trump's plans to overhaul the government with senators chris murphy and tammy baldwin. then, exactly who will be running the government tomorrow? >> we have by far the highest iq of any cabinet ever assembled. [ cheers and applause ] >> new reports that a chaotic transition is way behind on hiring. plus, senator sherrod brown is here. after grilling trump's treasury nominee today. >> i'm pretty surprised, mr. mnuchin, i'm surprised you don't know these things. and rick perry learns about his government. >> after being briefed on so many of the vital functions of the department of energy i
regret recommending its elimination. >> when "all in" starts right now. good evening from washington, d.c., i'm chris hayes. in 16 hours, around noon tomorrow just a few miles from here donald trump will be sworn in as the president of the united states of america. just hours after having received a briefing that only 11 other americans have ever gotten on how to launch a nuclear weapon and potentially start a nuclear war. this was the scene tonight, trump at the inauguration concert at the lincoln memorial where he took in performances from among others lee greenwood, toby keith, three doors down and an act known as the piano guys who did a cover of a one direction song on an open piano then performed a strong for the trump faithful called "it's gonna be okay." when all the singing was over, it was the president-elect's turn to address his supporters. >> i'm the messenger. i'm just the messenger. and we were tired. and i love you.
believe me, i love you. we all got tired of seeing what was happening. and we wanted change but we wanted real change and i look so forward to tomorrow. we're going to see something that is going to be so amazing. >> trump also addressed the concert itself and the performers. >> i'd like to congratulations our incredible entertainers tonight. toby and lee greenwood and all of the great talent, it was really very special. this started out tonight being a small little concert and then we had the idea maybe we'll do in the front of the lincoln memorial. i don't know if it's ever been done before but if it has, very seldom. we didn't know if anybody would even come tonight, this hasn't
been done before. >> point of fact, it has been done before, actually, by the last guy. eight years ago president obama held his inauguration concert, quite famously, in that very same place. the lincoln memorial. beyonce was there, bruce springsteen, u2. there is virtually no more different transition than two people so different in background but perhaps the most consequential difference is on policy. we are about to see a massive shift in how the federal government operates and who it helps and hurs. the los angeles angels of anaheim says they're going to clamp down on more people singled out for deportation. including the privatization of the corporation for public broadcasting, the elimination of the national endowment for the arts and humanities. the blueprint being used by trump's team would reduce spending. the trump team's budget hues closely to a recent heritage foundation report which takes a meat ax to everything other than
defense, including, crucially, social security, medicare and medicaid. cutting social security and medicare has long been a goal for house speaker paul ryan and while trump has vowed not to cut those programs he said today he's ready to sign what ryan sends his way. >> i love paul, i don't know if paul is here, he's out writing legislation because he's got so much legislation to write. he's never had it so good and he's actually got somebody that's going to sign it. >> that's on the spending side. then there's taxes. there is perhaps no issue on which there is more consensus among republicans, including trump that cutting taxes for the wealthy, despite the massive increase in income inequality we've seen over the past 40 years. something trump made clear when he was caught on camera a week after being elected shaking hands at an expensive manhattan steak house. >> have a good meal. >> thank you. thank you.
>> we'll get your taxes down, don't worry. >> as republicans figure out how to reshape the country, democrats are searching for the best path of resistance. the most recent model is the gop approach eight years ago worked out at a dinner as "frontline" reports the night president obama was inaugurated? >> three hours some of the brightest minds in the republican party debated how to be relevant. >> the point i made was that we had to be prepared in the tradition of wooden at ucla to run a full court press and see how obama behaved and offer an alternative to what he wanted to do. >> the republicans agreed on a tough new strategy. to block the president, fightage by his own ideology and his own behaviors. >> the feeling was that if that group could cooperate and if that group could lead that the wilderness might not be a
generation away. >> joining me now to discuss the gop agenda and the democrats' own path forward, senator tammy baldwin, senator chris murphy, democrat of connecticut. good to see you here. usually we're talking over satellites. you are both senators who are what we call in cycle which mines you will be up in 2018, it will be your first reelection for both of you so that's a big deal. i presume you want to stay, senators. >> yeah, i'm planning on it. >> sort of interesting because you know when you think about the politics of the moment what it cashes out to is folks like yourself and how you'll think about how you represent your constituents in this environment are democrats going to have a dinner like the dinner the republicans had where you all get together and figure out how to block what's coming down the pike? >> are we going to have a dinner like that? >> i don't know, we can go out to dinner lateer tonight. we don't have to have a dinner because he's making this so easy. the country very clearly is going to unite around the idea
that you shouldn't throw out health care for 20 million americans without a replacement. there is no public support out there for the privatization of medicare, medicaid and social security and so this doesn't have to be a fairly complicated internal strategy he just seems to be landing on the wrong side of public opinion on everything. >> and i think about when i ran for senate in 2012. the people sent me here to stand up to powerful interests and fight for wisconsin's working class, help them get ahead. they're struggling. and i think moving forward to the extent that trump came to washington and promised working people things like getting rid of unfair trade deals and buy america policies, et cetera, we need to hold him accountable to those words and when he's going
to do things that harm the working people of my state we resist with every ounce of our energy. >> what does that mean? one of the things that happened -- so right now this hill article today was interesting to me because i think the aca fight has taken front and center because they moved on that first. they'll move that through the budget. funny we're passing budgets again, we haven't done that for a while. but they're going to move that through reconciliation. it will mean they don't need to clear the filibuster threshold of 60. what can you practically as a senator? can you slow things down? do you think you can win over three of your colleagues? >> first of all, as we did last weekend, engaging the people finding their voice, telling their own stories. i had -- there were several rallies across the state of wisconsin but i attended one where person after person shared what this would mean to them, the harm it would cause.
it will cause in some cases death, in other cases bankruptcies like we used to see with regularity prior to the passage of these health reforms and it will impact every american so part of it is engaging the people on this but while -- >> but those engagements have to turn into votes at some point. >> absolutely. >> unless ron johnson hears those folks, your colleague in wisconsin who was just reelected, unless he hears those votes and thinks i don't want to vote for this aca bill -- >> so there's a couple of things and i suspect chris shares my experience of republicans in the senate quietly to us saying, you know, this isn't quite working out the way we thought and we are hearing from our constituents and they are nervous. we need to make sure because they can repeal it with a simple majority through the reconciliation process they can't replace it with just 51 votes. >> and trump is screwing this
thing up for them because he continues to say that you can't repeal it without an immediate replacement. guess what, they cannot do that. they do not have the votes to pass a replacement so they are creating -- >> this is a crucial point. they can't do the replacement through reconciliation. they can do the repeal through reconciliation but a replacement they need democrat votes. >> they need democratic votes and even if they only needed republican votes, they couldn't find the votes to pass a replacement so they are setting up expectations for themselves that they cannot meet. then there are things they can't do through reconciliation, some of the privatization of medicare and social security, you can't do that through reconciliation. they still need democratic votes so there's the ability to resist and even when they need 50 they've set these expectations that they can't find a way to get to. so this is going to be hard. >> what do you say to people -- and i want to talk about -- people have been, there's a discussion happened, people look at the approval ratings and say these are historically low and
even if these polls are off five or ten points they're still historically low. even if you give him the benefit of the doubt, 38%, 39%, 37%, barack obama was at 65%. then people said it didn't matter, the guy got elected, gravity doesn't matter how much does public opinion matter do you think? >> you know, certainly he has rough numbers going into inauguration day. i think it's really clear from those that he has got to do a lot to earn the trust of the american people and it is going to matter, you know, i harper from people as i travel the state of wisconsin who voted for hillary, voted for trump, voted for gary johnson. i think he has a short time period to make it clear whether he's going to follow through on the promises he made to working people who in the end gave him the edge in my state. i think it's a very short time period. >> to deliver for those voters. >> absolutely.
to -- and the early indicators with his nominees for cabinet posts, he said he was going to drain the swamp. excuse me, these are the powerful the, the billionaires, the bankers, et cetera, he's populating his cabinet with. i think people are troubled already. >> he's made a very clear claim that only he can fix what's wrong in your life. right? obama's metric was is washington different? did i change the culture? republicans kind of controlled that because if they didn't work with him, obama was a failure. trump says no, i am going to pal papally and tangibly take your life. people can figure out after two years whether what he said is true so if he doesn't deliver on it and nothing he's proposing is going to make those people's lives different, that approval rating which is low today is more dangerous for him two years from now. >> do you think it's dangerous for the other people in his party? donald trump has a different political calculus, but the
folks you work with in your body, your colleagues as they're thinking about what they're going to support, they're thinking about what their voters and constituents want. >> and back when the republican party was a trickle-down party, they were losing seats left and right in the house and senate. i think people think this is a different republican party so when they figure out it's the same old party yes, in the midterms a lot of their members are going to be in trouble. >> the republican establishment owns washington now. >> they do. >> presidency and both houses of congress. >> can't blame it on you. >> they'll try. >> i was going to say. and republicans in the senate will own this cabinet and so there's no escaping this. >> they're going to blame it -- the press is now the new enemy will be what will happen. senator tammy baldwin, senator chris murphy, great to have you here in person. >> thank you. less than a day until trump is sworn in, there's a staggering number of positions yet to be filled in his administration including key
hispanic. trump is on track to have at most just three of his nominees confirmed tomorrow, his first day in office, james mattis, secretary of defense john kelly, secretary of homeland security and possibly mike pompeo as cia director. that's compared to seven for both president obama and george w. bush. but the cabinet is only the tip of the proverbial federal bureaucracy iceberg. there are about 4,000 positions for political appointees. of those, 690 are crucial, trump has announced his picks for just 30 of them. meaning 96% of these key offices won't even have a nominee when he takes over the government according to an expert on transitions, the brookings institution, "it's just -- there is no other word for it, weird, for those of us who have been involved in government for decades." observers are most concerned about the national security council. politico reports most of the nsc's key policy jobs are still open including senior directors handling such issues as the middle east, russia, afghanistan, economic sanctions and nuclear proliferation. several different factors have contributed to the slowdown including multiple staff shakeups and above november 8 the widespread expectation even among the trump folks that trump would not win. it also appears at least in part to be political. according to "washington post" josh rogin, james mattis requested almost two dozen obama appointees be allowed to stay on because he didn't want the pentagon to be caught flat footed in the case of an early
emergency. the transition team reportedly pushed back allowing mattis to retain only a half dozen top officials. i'm joined by congressman mo brooks from alabama who serves on the house armed services committee. congressman, are you concerned about the vacancies on the national security council, regional directors there if there's a north korea, icbm, if there's an emergency starting at 4:00 p.m. tomorrow, does it concern you there aren't the folks tasked with monitoring that? >> i'm comfortable the people we have serving america in the intelligence agencies and national defense, pentagon oriented, they are on watch and they are there to protect america's security and they will be able to do so throughout this transition phase from the obama administration to the trump administration. >> right, but it's not the transition tomorrow, right? because as of tomorrow it's the trump administration. you've got the national security council unstaffed.
i think you and i would agree the national security council is pretty important, right? >> well, the national security council is pretty important but it's more important to get the right people in the right positions and to do so in a deliberative way if that's what is required than it is to rush and get the wrong people in those positions. so i think donald trump and his administration is being very deliberate in making sure they get the right people and the right places even if it takes more time than it might otherwise. >> and you think even if in the case of general mattis asking for folks to stay on, even if it means getting rid of people so there are empty desks in the pentagon because those folks may have been appointed by the previous president? >> i'm quite comfortable our new secretary of defense will be able to handle the circumstances as they are presented and i have not seen anything that suggests national security is at risk because of the way the transition is unfolding. >> i want to ask you about an interesting quote i thought in politico about trent lott, republican senator, of course.
a lobbyist close to several people on the transition said the transition team was era lying on lobbyists and others for lists of potential policy recommendations. do you think it's a good idea to rely on lobbyists to tell you who to hire? >> i think donald trump and the transition team ought to be relying on as many people as they can in order to have the largest pool of applicants for the positions that need to be filled. that's the way you get the person you need to do the task that is required. so it's one thing to have an expansive list. it's another thing if you start picking people because of special interest influence. that influence being contrary to the interest of the united states of america so let's wait and see who's appointed, who's filling the positions before we start criticizing who might be in a large list that will be culled down to one for each position. >> trent lott said relying and i would ask if you think it's consonant with the general theme of the trump campaign which was i think, and bracingly so, many
people cottoned to this, talking about the power of lobbyists, how bad they were and the power of special interests. >> let's wait and see who's appointed. don't judge now before we know how these ingredients will be mixed and put together and baked into a cake. let's see what the cake tastes like, looks like before you judge at the begin big looking at the ingredients. so i suggest we take our time and be deliberative and see how this is going to work its way out. something that would be helpful is if the senate would more expeditiously approve our cabinet members so the cabinet members where in a position to start reviewing these resumes and hiring people to fill the positions in their different cabinet positions. >> do you think it's okay to have hearings for someone in the cabinet if they haven't cleared their fbi background check or their ethics process? >> well, i would like to see everything done as thoroughly but as expeditiously as
possible. you have to weigh things. yes i would prefer the fbi background checks be completed. yes i would prefer the ethics issues to the extent they are real and not manufactured -- and we've seen a lot manufactured by democrats ethics issues that are more smoke than substance -- but you have to weigh that versus the inability to have the work done that needs to be done by timely filling of the position so there's a balancing act there that's very difficult in this strident political environment that you're seeing in washington, d.c., particularly as evidenced by how many democrats have said they're just going to shun the system, they're not going to be here for the inauguration tomorrow or the democrats who tried to strip about a dozen states of their influence over the election of the president which occurred on the house floor on january 6 where democrats objected to the approval of the electoral college votes of the southeastern states michigan, west virginia and wisconsin.
that's the rebellion against the constitution and normal transitions that we've seen in the past that you're looking at the trump administration have to deal with. >> you think that was a rebellion against the constitution? that's your phrase? >> absolutely. when you're trying to strip the electoral college votes of the states of florida, georgia, alabama, mississippi, north carolina, south carolina, michigan, west virginia and wisconsin, when you're trying to say none of those votes count, that's a denial of the right to vote and fortunately the democrats failed to have the votes of the house floor on january 6 to disregard the votes of those millions of americans who had cast their votes if for presidency in good faith. >> congressman last thing about rebellions against the constitution and the toxic partisan atmosphere. what's the best precedent for the house senate -- for the senate republicans refusing to even have a hearing for merrick garland for those 300 days of the last president's term? >> well, if reasoning behind what was done is quite simply we wanted the american people to voice their opinion on who they
wanted onprecedent? >> they voiced it loud and clear. i'm not concerned about precedent, i'm concerned about doing what is right and quite frankly i believe it was a proper strategy that will result in a supreme court justice who will do the right thing that as required by the constitution and american law as passed by congress not as made up by supreme beings on any judicial body. >> you are correct, congressman. a minority of americans did ratify that choice. thank you for your time tonight. >> have a good evening. coming up, senator sherrod brown talks about his grilling of trump's pick steve mnuchin, stick around.
it's important to understand that the president is now entering a world of public service. he's going to be asking his own appointees to make sacrifices. he's going to be asking our men and women in uniform to risk their lives in conflict around the world so, no, i don't think divestiture is too high a price to pay to be the president of the united states of america. >> walter shaub, the director of the heretofore office of government ethics has become a kind of unlikely hero in the fight against the conflicts of interest created by trump's decision to make tim kaine a stake in his vast business empire. he's become a thorn in the side of congressional republicans who are determined to look the other way of trump's many ethical quandaries. that's been the case with the chairman of the house government oversight committee jason chaffetz who you may remember last week publicly criticized schaub for refusing to meet with him since the election, even
threatening to subpoena schaub in order to get a meeting with him. thanks to a freedom of information act filed by the huffington post, we have an update. it turns out contrary to chaffetz's claim, schaub had been completely willing to meet with him after the election, in fact, e-mail correspondents between shaub and chaffetz show he accepted an invitation to meet with chaffetz in december only to get stood up by the congressman. an e-mail reads "sorry to have missed this, the chairman's schedule was backed up." chaffetz and shaub have scheduled a new meeting for january 23 and we'll let you know if the congressman makes it to that one. y pause a spontaneous moment? cialis for daily use treats ed and the urinary symptoms of bph. tell your doctor about your medicines, and ask if your heart is healthy enough for sex. do not take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain, or adempas® for pulmonary hypertension, as this may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. do not drink alcohol in excess.
today on capitol hill, trump's treasury secretary nominee steve mnuchin faced tough questioning about his time running a bank called one west that many owners have said was one of the most predatory and heartless banks during the foreclosure crisis. sherrod brown got a chance to question mnuchin about the bank's practices. >> is it true that one west's independent audit firm said it violated the service members civil relief act by initiating foreclosures on 54 active duty military families? that's what the independent audit firm said. yes or no? >> well, you have the document in front of you. i don't. >> well, they do. is it true that one of the employees who was in charge of the modification, one of one
west employees has accused one west of not having any process in place to help its 3,000 fha and v.a. mortgage borrowers afford foreclosure. >> it seems to me in all due respect you want to shoot questions ask me and not let me explain. >> i think the issue is the one west purchase went well for the treasury secretary des nigh but it was a disaster for homeowners, for employees, for investors and for taxpayers. joining me now is sherrod brown, ranking member of the senate banking committee and he sits on the senate finance committee which held today's hearing. senator, did you feel like you got answers to your questions from the nominee? >> sort of but not really. he started off -- he was defensive in our individual meeting. he knows he didn't -- he knows he made a lot of money at the expense of active duty servicemen and women, of retirees. this is -- mnuchin is in a nutshell what the financial
crisis was about, somebody that came in and invested a little bit of money and didn't mind -- knew there was more money -- more profit in foreclosure than in modification and we're seeing that multiplied to the point now, chris, where the white house is beginning to look like a goldman sachs executive retreat. it's one more goldman sachs person after another and that's the whiff of something in the white house that trump promised would never happen. >> what do you say -- i was watching the hearing and a lot of what he said was "a lot of other people did this, too, a lot of banks did this, too." and in that respect he was right in so far as a lot of banks comported themselves the way one west did and some argue because of the incentives put in place by the treasury department under barack obama. can you blame him for gaming the system in the way that other banks gained the system? >> well, some of what he did was
right on the cusp what obama was just taking office. i'm not saying that there wasn't too much wall street influence in the early days of the obama administration and i know when the president took office he wanted to reassure markets and he was going to bring in some hold hands that might have been there steadying the ship early and putting that aside, it doesn't mean that you put another person like that at treasury. you need -- there's way better people to choose than somebody that's been a goldman sachs employee, goldman sachs executive for a number of years and then did the same things he learned at goldman sachs on commodities issues, on foreclosures. on a whole host of issues with china and other things. >> it struck me as ironic today as he was talking about he had failed to disclose $95 million in assets. he explained it as accidental, that the paperwork is extensive
and thorough and he was sorry he missed it. there's some irony in so far as there's a 90 plus-year-old woman who missed 27 cents on a payment who got foreclosed on and lots of people had the experience of trying to wade through loan modification paperwork and that didn't -- that execute didn't help them when they were dealing with one west. >> you're right about that and i just feel he forgot to disclose this and then he said that some of his offshore accounts, they were doing it, he didn't make any money from it, he was doing it for -- on behalf of not for profits and i don't think not for profits need to move offshore. that's why they're classified as not for profits and we're doing as we've done before petitioned and he was one of the five or six that i think people are going to coalesce around and the more we find out about betsy devos, the more we find out
about the secretary of state designee, the more we find out about mr. mnuchin the more people will be disappointed, partly their thicket of financial kinds of problems they might have because they've been involved sometimes in things that are a little unseemly and partly because their views are so out of the mainstream. you've got the guy, secretary of hhs who wants to raise the retirement age for medicare. tell me people in ohio are voting for somebody who would raise the eligibility age for medicare. obviously not. >> senator, you're a collegial and generally amiable guy and i think you and your colleagues across the aisle have a good working relationship. there was a pretty testy moment with the chair of this committee, i wanted to play it and give you a chance to respond with chair roberts. take a listen. >> senator wyden, i've got a
valium pill you might want to take before the second round. just a suggestion sir. >> mr. chairman, i hope that that comment about valium doesn't set the tone for 2017 in this committee. i just -- i like senator roberts but i just can't quite believe that he would say that to a distinguished senator. >> i said that to the president of the united states. >> i would hope that doesn't set the tone for the session. mr. chairman -- >> all right, all right. >> i said -- please. please. >> senator corker -- >> i have the time. >> the relationship we're building is so different from this. this is just outrageous. i don't know about outrageous but i think a pinprick of humor might help this committee from time to time. >> what was going on there, senator? >> well, if you've got -- my wife connie says who chris knows, if you have to explain the joke, it's not really that funny as he was trying to say that was a joke.
i'ved that happen to many many times with connie. it was mean spirited. chairman wyden, a ranking member, he was doing his job, he was pointing out the delays in this hearing were because of trump's delays in moving slowly and vetting badly and picking billionaires, that was the reason. he was pointing out problems with mnuchin not turning in some of his paperwork and getting this disclosure. so wyden was doing his job. roberts knew that and i don't want to talk a lot about senator roberts but there is no room for that kind of personal stuff. my view is always it's whom you fight for and what you fight against and i don't want to fight against any of my colleagues personally. i want to fight against what they're doing and i don't like what this committee is doing with mnuchin, frankly. >> senator sherrod brown of ohio, thank you for your time, appreciate it. still to come, days of
thing 1 tonight, the senate confirmation hearing for energy secretary. trump's nominee, former governor rick perry enjoyed a moment with senator al franken. >> thank you so much for coming into my office. did you enjoy meeting me? [ laughter ] >> i hope you were as much fun on that dais as you were on your couch. >> well -- [ laughter ] >> may i rephrase that, sir? >> please. please. please. oh, my lord. >> well, i think we've found our "saturday night live" soundbite. [ laughter ]
>> that's a master class in dead pan from al franken. perry, who served 14 years as governor of texas will probably be easily confirm bud we could make the case that trump chose his former rival solely to remind viewers of perry's most mortifying political moment. >> it's three agencies of government when i get there that are gone -- commerce, education and the -- um -- what's the third one there? let's see. let's see. >> oh, my. >> i can't. the third one, i can't. sorry. oops. >> the one perry forgot, that third one he wanted to eliminate, drum roll, was, the department of energy. spoiler alert, he changed his mind about wanting to shut it down. today he explained why and that is thing 2 in 60 seconds.
>> my past statements made over five years ago about abolishing the department of energy do not reflect my current thinking. in fact, after being briefed on so many of the vital functions of the department of energy, i regret recommending its elimination. >> just this morning we learned the trump transition team intends to propose eliminating the department of energy's office of energy efficiency and renewable energy, office of electricity and make other massive cuts to your department. do you support these cuts? yes or no? >> well, senator, maybe they'll have the same experience i had and forget that they said that. >> now, whether governor perry is capable of doing the job he's nominated for or not, it's a lot easier to call for the elimination of a government department than it is to run one and appreciate what it does and more broadly it's easier to bemoan bureaucracy and bloat than to make government work and deliver for penal.
outside trump international hotel in new york, demonstrations just wrapped up, an event called "we stand united, new york rally to protect shared values" on the night before trump's inauguration. it was one of several protests planned over the next several days, including a slew of demonstrations planned in d.c., there was one a while ago and during inauguration tomorrow. the biggest protest is set for the day after inauguration on saturday, the woman's march on washington is expected to draw 200,000 people and more than 600 sister marches are scheduled to take place around the country. people hitting the streets to protest trump's presidency began the night he was elected, particularly the night after. since then we've seen that combined with people lobbying their representatives and showing up en masse to protest trump's pledge to repeal obamacare. ironically, many democrats who, frankly, recoiled at the tea
this is not a night of rhetoric. we're not up here spouting cliches tonight. we're saying this is a time for action and we will put ourselves on the line for that. >> joining me now, maria teresa kumar, president of voto latino, howard dean and also a republican strategist from the great state of texas.
so, you know, there is more mobilization on the center left -- and i mean that, like, starting in the center center left all the way to leftiest left. there's more mobilization i've seen in that part of the country's political spectrum than since the iraq war. do you think that's -- >> i think that's fair. i was having a conversation where people are saying they're going into yoga class and people are talking about meditation and the meditation is the martin luther king speech and they're saying "we're rallying tomorrow. it's a different level. part of is because people were calculating that hillary clinton was going to win, even the folks that sat out folks were saying my protest vote is not participating in this election but it's okay because we have a sure winner the polls. so what we're living in now is a moment of bearing witness but also action.
>> matt i remember covering the tea party and watching it grow and going to one of their first events in d.c. when i was a reporter here. the hardest thing to do in politics is deliver bodies into spaces, right? so people show up to stuff, that's a hard thing to do. and that's what the tea party pulled off successfully. it's a useful model for democrats to look at what the tea party was able to do during that summer. >> there's no question that the tea party peaked and they were delivering bodies and having an impact in republican primaries across the country that's waned and part of the problem with the tea party is they weren't nationally organized. it was decentralized. you're not seeing that on the left but after these inauguration protests, will democrats work with republicans on big issues? do they want to work on trade and infrastructure? they can protest for the next 24 to 48 hours but at some point
they have to start legislating. >> isn't the election obstruction in to me the lesson of the mcconnell strategy is what you said before, the old way you legislate there's the venn diagram and you say let's shade on this and work on this. the mcconnell strategy was anything you do will legitimate this president, give people the signal that it's bipartisan, you need to block, block, block, fight, fight, fight. in some ways that was quite effective. is that the blueprint inside and outside. >> it certainly isn't inside. schumer is a consummate deal make sore there's no way that will happen. in the house you don't need to do this. i think what we're missing here is the democratic party is really complicated here. the old left, the michael moores of the world are going to do one thing. the people we have to worry about are what i call the first global generation. these are kids who voted for obama twice, voted for hillary
clinton but are not democrats and don't like institutions. what they do -- they will not be at the ramparts, they will do something else. they will do something. >> i think that's -- and that's where the progressive movement is talking about -- they have a tendency of following the next shiny object. everyone is talking about the white working class and how to bring them back into the party and at the same time making sure they're keeping the constituency. these are young people very much interested in a third party and if they don't get it right the progressives have an opportunity not to cement the agenda. >> let me break in for a moment to say what you're watching. that is union station in washington, d.c. and the president-elect is about to say a few words. let's take a listen [ cheers and applause ] >> thank you very much. sit down and enjoy. thank you very much.
[ applause ] >> a candlelight dinner happening there with the vice president-elect, mike pence as well. i guess he's going to say some more. >> we weren't given much of a chance. they said the same thing about brexit as well and and boy did we win. [ cheers and applause ] [ inaudible ] the "wall street journal" came out with this beautiful map and they had the red state blue state. and there were a lot of red
states that weren't supposed to be red. a lot of them. but more impressive was there was a map a couple days after the election and it showed the red counties blue counties and the entire country practically other than a couple of little points was red. that was some big victory. that was some big victory. [ applause ] and records were set that haven't been beaten since ronald reagan from the republican side and we've gone back. in iowa we had areas that haven't been won since 1952 and we had areas -- folks from iowa, you know where i'm talking about. they said you can't possibly win this area and we won the area and we have locations and we have destinations and i said before and i was telling some
people the next time, four years from now, the next time we're going to win the old-fashioned way, we're going to win because we did so well, because it was so overwhelming the thing that we did because it was so beautiful how great our cabinet -- all of whom are here tonight, how great our cabinet has performed. we have a cabinet, i believe, the likes of which has never been appointed. there's never been a cabinet like this. i will say the other side is going absolutely crazy. [ laughter ] they're going crazy. but we have a group of people that i just felt we had to go. today, as you know, we appointed as secretary of agriculture, hes
as secretary of agriculture, hes oh, there he is, sonny purdue. he came go into my office two months ago. since then i saw 10 people that everybody liked, politically correct and i kept thinking back to sonny perdue, a great, great farmer, he loves the farms, knows everything about farming, knows everything about agriculture, he's been successful in farming. back to sonny perdue, a great, great farmer. he loves the farms. knows everything about farming. knows everything about agriculture. he's been successful in farming. he knows the good stuff and the bad stuff. but people came into my office and they said, i'm really wanting the job. i said, let me ask you a question. do you have any experience with farms or agriculture? no, sir, i don't. i said, have you ever seen a farm? the one gentleman, we'll find something else. but i can't make him secretary of agriculture.