tv All In With Chris Hayes MSNBC January 24, 2017 12:00am-1:01am PST
the ability for this white house to tell the truth. >> it looked -- honestly, it looked like a million and a half people. >> then. >> any other conversations between general flynn and other members of the russian government? >> not that i'm aware of. >> new reports of an investigation into trump's national security adviser, a lawyer behind a new trump ethics lawsuit joins me live. and about that women's march. >> and the president is not america. >> tonight cecile richards, gloria stein 'em on what may have been the largest protest in america history and what this movement does next. >> this can't end today. >> "all in" starts right now. good evening from new york. i'm chris hayes on what the white house called donald trump's first working day on the fourth day, sean spicer said he is not in the business of lying to the american people. >> i believe that we have to be
honest with the american people. i think sometimes we can disagree with the facts. there are certain things that we may miss -- we may not fully understand when we come out, but our intention is never to lie to you, jonathan. >> spicer felt the need to make that claim after he came under heavy criticism for his bizarre appearance on saturday where he berated the white house press kofrps for its inauguration coverage before storming off without taking questions. he said nothing about the historic women's march taking place as he spoke, which might well have been the largest demonstration in history, estimating 3.2 million people took to the streets in the u.s. alone. instead spielser made false claims about fairly trivial matters including inauguration day ridership on the d.c. melt row while suggesting without evidence that trump's was the most watched inauguration ever. the next day kellyanne conway defemd he using a novel argument
in an interview with our own chuck todd. >> you're saying it is a falsehood and they're giving sean spicer, our press secretary, gave alternative facts to that. but the point remains. >> wait a minute, alternative facts? alternative facts, four of the five facts he uttered, the one thing he got right was zeke miller. four of the five facts he ulterred were not true. alternative facts are not facts. they're falsehood. >> whether or not the white house accepts an objective reality we all agree on, a reality in which facts are facts has massive implications. consider the unemployment rate, it is undeniably an imprecise measure and an extremely bed rock, a way to gauge how americans are doing overall, how the economy is doing. touring the campaign trump dismiss the unemployment rate as totally fiction and claimed it was actually 42%. >> i have seen numbers of 24%. i actually saw a number of 42% unemployment. 42%! and it could be zbll for the record, unemployment, the most commonly used measure, there are several measure willed by the government, stands at 4.7%.
skld in light ofhose comnts this question, what is the national unemployment rate, spicer today refused to state the w pridens position. >> he's not focused on statistics as much as he is on whether or not the american people are doing better as a whole. i think too often in washington we get our heads wrapped around a number and a statistic and we look at and forget the faces and families and businesses behind those numbers. so i think that's where his head is at. >> that logic, trump of course does not need to lower the unemployment rate to prove he is fulfilling his promise of putting more people to work, he can decide whether or not it happened. when conway was asked yesterday to respond to a white house petition that calls for the immediate release of the president's full tax returns, which has garnered more than 276,000 signatures, she said this. >> the white house response is that he is not going to release his tax returns. we litigated this through the election.
people didn't care. they voted for him. let me make it clear, most americans are focus on what their tax returns will look like while presume is in office, not what his look like. >> after taking heelt for stating flatout trump would not release his returns, conway treat she meant he is still waiting for that auld i think -- we've never seen evidence that it exists -- to be completed. as for the rest of the statement, the issue wasn't litigated in the election since the trump camp punted with the audit claims. as for the notion people don't care, statistics -- those pesky statistics, say otherwise. 74% of americans according to a poll want to see the returns. then suggested that the gravity of the white house would change trump the president. but he and his team have con ported themselves the same way they did during the campaign, giving no ground while making announcements that are untrue or
unverifyable. think about what happens if the president and republicans in congress kick 20 million people off healthcare and say they didn't, or massively cut taxes for rich people and say, tum willy, we raised them, don't worry about it. right now at this moment is when the parameters of that debate are set, whether we are establishing a baseline for whether there is actually some collective selt of facts and objective reality we can agree on or whether the white house can get away with offering alternative facts when they don't like the real ones. joining me now michael field, an msnbc political analyst and richard stengel, an msnbc analyst. michael, i guess i want to ask you this. let's distinguish between whether this matters politically or not. >> okay. >> it may not matter. i mean i think basically the president fighting with the press, people don't care about. let me stipulate that to you. >> right. >> my bigger concern is what information the president is getting and what he believes, what he actually in his heart believes. is he reliant on actual information? just now we got a report in the
meeting with congressional leaders the president brought up the debunked claim there were millions of fraudulent votes cast in the election. i am led to believe he actually believes that, which to me is more worrisome than if they were lying about believing it. if that makes sense. >> no, it does make sense. i think it does go to how these things are sourced for him. where is he going on the internet to get this information? who is he talking to, whether it was in the campaign, the transition, and now the west wing, that is providing him with this information? but i think a more important question though is who then goes to him and goes, mr. president, that's not right, that's not correct. >> right. >> that is not the truth that you thought it was. that to me, that person is the most important person in the white house in my view. >> that is a great point, michael. one of the things that struck me when i've reported on government, particularly the federal government, particularly high level of the federal government as the white house is, a huge amount of what a government dolls is process information and pass it up to people to make decisions.
let's be clear, sometimes that information is wrong, right? >> yes. >> and it has huge consequences when it is, weapons of mass destruction in iraq, but it is also the project of the government bureaucracy like the state department for intake and process the information and get it to the people running the government, to make sure they can make the best, most informed decisions. >> yes. in fact, when i was in the state department i barely had time to go on the internet to look for anything because the inflow of information was so gigantic. that is litigated too as well. i mean words matter in government, right in so everything, every word that comes out of a principle's mouth is litigated over and over. gigantic difference in saying we're concerned about affairs in south africa as opposed to we're deeply concerned or very concerned. people litigate and struggle over those things. the fact is the words that come out of the president's mouth influence the entire government and entire world, and those are the most desperately fought-over words. the fact that the president
seems to not have even talking points when he is speaking is a scary situation. >> michael, i want to come back to you in a second but i want to follow up on that, rich arld. the president said something saturday where he muse willed, we didn't take iraq's oil, maybe we have another chance. we have 5,000 men and women impelled with the iraq army. things like that can have a big impact. >> can you unequivocally state this administration will not send more troops into iraq, as the president puts, to take the oil? >> i'm not going to talk about what we may or may not do. the president has been very clear he doesn't telegraph forward taking options off the table. >> i think barack obama, who had probably the most meticulous filter of any human being who ever lived, whenever he was talking about iraq or syria -- >> you could watch in real-time. it was like a spinning ball. >> he was talking from a teleprompter often because he wanted to be so precise. to have a thing where you are freelancing verbiage, where he's not the world's most articulate
person, can change what is going on in foreign policy overnight. >> part of what is happening, michael, what trikes me too, is in the media environment, the informational environment in which we live, it is the case the president can assert something or the president's spokesperson can assert something and there's a significant portion of the population who if chosen -- if they have to choose between the "new york times" and the president or the president and a photo they saw, they're going to choose the president. >> right, yeah. >> that's part of what is happening here. >> yeah, that's a big part of what is happening here. it has become over the course of the last 18 months the justification for the entrenchment donald trump personally will take and certainly members of his administration will take. we have seen it on putin, we have seen it on the e-mails, on a number of things, where that unconventional wisdom or thinking has become the convention.
that's largely because they get that reinforcement from those supporters who don't care whether or not it is true, factual or whatever. but the fact that, you know, you're fighting and you're moving in a certain direction, we're behind you with that, that's what matters. well, what i think the president learned this weekend, and certainly sean spicer did, was it is a little more complicated than that and it does matter what you say, how you say it, when you say it. to richard's point, words mean things and the precision out of the white house matters most. >> and there's a credibility issue here. you were talking about the unemployment rate in the intro, but let's say conditions under a national emergency and the president's spokesperson comes out and says things about what the government is or isn't do, what areas have not been evacuated, that is a simple relaying of information,ut there has to be a basic repository of trust in that pronouncement.
otherwise it is a terrifying thought to see what you do in the absence of that. >> pat moynihan used to say you're entitled to your own opinions but not your own facts. the spokesperson has a lot of different audience, he has the president, the white house and the american people. people need to trust what he is saying is a fact and has been verified, and even though every administration tries to create their own narrative -- >> yeah, let's be clear about that. >> because you mention, chris, in a national disaster, that spokesperson is speaking for the nation. he's not just speaking for the president. >> right. michael steel and rick stengel, thank you for your time. appreciate it. still ahead, the first day of donald trump's presidency was met with record-breaking protest across the country and around the world. we have people here you do not want to miss. hours after michael flynn is sworn in as national security adviser, news he has been under investigation for contact with russian officials. that story is after this two-minute break.
and i will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which i am about to enter. >> the duties of the office on which i am about to enter. >> so help had me god. >> so help me god. >> vice president mike pence yesterday swearing in senior white house staff members including former brightbart publisher steve bannon, steve of staff reince priebus and michael flynn. hours after he took the oath of office the "wall street journal" reporting flynn is being investigated by u.s. counterintelligence officials examining his contact with russian officials. it was followed up by a similar report from cnn, there have been previous reports of a long-term investigation led by the fbi into ties with trump associates and the kremlin. this is the first time it may go to the new white house. this particular probe appears to center on a series of phone calls reported earlier this month between flynn and the russian ambassador to the u.s.
multiple calls were reported to have taken place on december 29th, and that day is significant because it is the exact same day then president obama announced sanctions against russia in response to its alleged interference in the 2016 election. one day later russian president vladimir putin declared he would not retaliate. trump's team repeatedly changed its story about these calls, first insisting all contact between flynn and the russian ambassador had taken place on december 25th and 28th before the announcement, then later conceding the two men had in fact spoken on the 29th following a a series of exchanges by phone and text. today white house press secretary sean spicer changed the story yet again. >> there's been one call. i talked to general flynn about this again last night. one call talked about four subjects. one was the loss of life that occurred in the plane crash that took their military choir. two was christmas and holiday greetings. three was to facilitate -- or to talk about a conference in syria on isis, and four was to set up a -- to talk about after the
inauguration, setting up a call between president putin and president trump. >> asked if president trump would stop the investigation, listen to that. >> i don't believe he has spoken to anyone about that, and i don't know -- he has not made an indication he would stop an investigation of any sort. >> joining me former u.s. intelligence officer malcolm nantz, author of the pilot to steal the 2016 election. malcolm, let me start with this. i don't know what it would mean to have the national security advisor of the united states under a counterintelligence investigation. what does that mean to you? i mean presumably we have to clear an fbi background check to get security clearance, and how would you get security clearance if an investigation was happening? >> well, general flynn probably was maintaining his security clearance, but he's now working at the pleasure of the president of the united states. the president can order him to
be cleared. but in this certain circumstance with regards to a counterintelligence investigation, you might have caught me as i was coming on camera, that last statement was really shocking. as of right now we don't know what the fbi's counterintelligence forces are actually asking about general flynn. it was very suspicious -- and i use the word suspicious, that on the day that we are kicking out 35 russian spice and diplomats from this country in retaliation for a cyber warfare attack on the fundamental democratic system of the united states that general flynn would actually either take calls or make calls to the russian ambassar to the united states. now, we don't know what was said, but, believe me, the russians have a version of what was said, and it had better jieb with what general flynn is telling the counterintelligence
officers who will be interviewing him. >> that is also -- there is sort of a factual matter here, did he make the calls, how many calls were there. this is from cnn's report. they said the calls were captured by routine u.s. eaves dropping targeting the russian diplomats according to intelligence and law enforcement officials. that's pleural. i should say three outlets have the story and they have multiple sources. here is my question. it strikes me, substance aside, a brazen kind of leak from these officials blazecally saying, we are monitoring your phone calls to the man who is now the national security adviser to the united states. >> well, general flynn would know from all of his great experience as director of defense intelligence and as an officer coming up in the military ranks, there is something called own-force monitoring where government systems and people who are related to high levels of government, for security purposes they do monitor phone communications, you know, particularly for counterintelligence purposes, to make sure someone is not an agent of a hostile intelligence agency. so general flynn would know
that. but in this particular call, he might feel that he had a secure communication with the russians. i don't know what would make him feel secure, and that of course is suspicious in itself. that's why we now have spy hunters going through these phone communications. >> well, i mean it appears so far from the reporting we have from the three different outlets, you had strong feelings about one of the first appearances of the new president on saturday, he went to the cia. >> right. >> it has been sort of a controversial appearance. it was referred to as despicable by john brynan, ex head of cia. leon pa net ah said he forgot he was president. he stood in front of the wall of honoring, honoring the 117 members who gave their lives from the agency. he talked about crowd size, his war with the media. there was a lot of whooping and hollering and it is unclear whether it came from trump staff and partisans or actually the members of the agency. afterwards he said, i had a great meeting at cia headquarters, packed house, paid great respect to wall. amazing people. your response to that event? >> well, i would like to say that i beat john brennan by calling that event despicable by
one hour. i think i was pretty vehement when i went on cnn the other day and said it was actually a disgusting act. i've been in that hall. i have three friends on that wall. i have put my hands on their scars. i read their names in the book of those who were lost. i know how big that room is, and it is not very big. there's enough space for about maybe 40, 50 people inside the actual hall with the podium. but there's an upper atrium, an upper hallway that's a t hallway with two columns down the middle past the security check point you can get a couple hundred people into. cia staff knowing what the hall means would never initiate wild shouting and clapping. i have spoken to many officers in the last couple of days, and the only thing i can say is they are all to a person, man and woman, disgusted at the behavior of donald trump at that site.
he only said eight words about those who were lost and never discussed the intelligence community at all. absolutely disgusting really. just disgusting. >> thanks for your time tonight, malcolm nance. >> my pleasure. >> the ethics lawyer suing president trump for violating the ethics. what it means to sue the president ahead.
today the trump white house took -- undertook what they call a day of action, a day devoted to doing the things trump said he would do on day one of his presidency. well, day four of his presidency at this point. now, the president made more than 30 different promises about things that he would do the
moment, even the minute he got into office, most of which he still has not acted on, we should be clear. here are the things he actually did do today. the president signed an executive order officially withdrawing the united states from the trans-pacific partnership, the multi-lateral trade deal said they would oppose in office. he signed an executive order reinstating the gag order. in addition to the executive orders we learned the official language of the executive order the president signed on friday proclaiming january 20th his inauguration day, a national day of pay receipt otheric devotion. presidents only have the power to declare one-time holiday for executive order. if you were hoping to celebrate the national day of patriotic devotion, too late. you missed it. they confirmed two cabinet appointments.
voted 66-32 confirming mike pompeo head of the cia. and confirmed rt, ex ceo of exxon, secretary of state. that followes senator marco rubio's decision not to block his nomination despite his previous public reservations. a protester held a fine prop behind rubio. we got evidence action is taken on something trump promised to do before he tooth the oath of office. on friday, reported that the trump organization did not appear to have filed the necessary paperwork in order to transfer management of the business to trump's sons. the white house insisted trump had resigned from his company so the documentation was simply not public at that time. today we have documented evidence at least some of the paperwork has been filed in the state of florida. all of the documents, we should note, are dated monday, january 23rd. even if those papers have been filed, ethics experts are saying it doesn't go far enough and are
a d.c. watchdog group filed a lawsuit in court guest the president of the united states. the group citizens for responsibility of ethics in washington, is led by a group of prominent lawyers and ethics experts who say by allowing hi hotels and other buses to accept foreign payments is violating clause that bars the president from accepting gifts from foreign governments. trump's lawyer said they did not consider payments to trump businesses to be a violation of
the emulents clause, but they would voluntarily donate to the federal treasury. experts say it is not good enough. their suit is a novel attempt to get the president to comply with long standing ethics laws and norms. joining me now, one of the ethics bringing the suit, one of the former ambassador norm eisen. let's start with this. can you sue presidents? this is a little unclear, right? what you can and cannot sue the president for is unclear, and obviously if anyone could sue the president at any time all of the -- any president would ever be doing is defending lawsuits. why do you think you legally have standing to sue the president of the united states? >> well, chris, this is a country of laws, not of men. no man, not even the president of the united states is above
the law. it is well recognized that when the president acts in violation of the constitution, you can bring a cause of action against him, and that's what we're doing today. it makes sense. three coequal, equally powerful branches in our checks and balance american system. the legislative branch, congress, the executive branch where the president sits, and the courts. and the way you activate the courts to do their job is by bringing these actions. of course, president trump can't flout the constitution as he is doing by accepting foreign payments and benefits directly prohibited by the emulents clause.
>> let's say some federal district court judge finds in your favorite, what would it mean for an article three judge to say, yes, the predent of the united states is in violation of the conition, mike, what is the remedy? has anyone done that before? has a federal cot declared a president in violation of the constitution? >> chris, we've had -- we have a long and very distinguished history in the united states of the courts standing up to executive branch officers, including the president, when they act out of line. in the bush administration there was a tremendous amount of litigation against the executive branch under the president's direction relating to guantanamo, to holding on to prisoners. this is just as unconstitution am. there's a direct prohibition on what president trump is do in. and it is true that no court has ever directly ruled on an emoluments case. they haven't had to because no president dared to do anything like this in the history of our country. >> so if you were -- if a court were to grant standing, which i
would imagine is the first thing they challenge you on and this were to get to the merits and you won, you can imagine this working its way through the courts and actually eventually probably go to the supreme court. the supreme court, you know, having a finding saying you need to divest or you are in breach of the constitution and you need to do x, y and z, that would be the ultimate end result here. >> that is the remedy we are seeking, an order from the court that president trump cannot receive these emoluments. the president has to abide by the court's dictates. this was established by john marshall at the beginning of our country. the judicial review of the constitution is supreme, and the president is going to have to follow that. it is a clear constitutional violation, chris. >> so -- >> and he's going to have to --
if the court rules, he's going to have to follow. >> i saw -- quickly, i saw a report today that the department of justice were defending in this case, is that -- i mean i guess it makes sense as you are suing him as the president of the united states. is that the appropriate entity to defend the president here? >> it is. that's what you do when the president is sued in his official capacity. it is a terrible waste of taxpayer money. it is really adding insult to injury, but that is the way the system works, and the department of justice is thoroughly professional. wonderful lawyers much i worked . i worked with them when i worked in the white house and i know they will do a professional job, but i think we have the better of the case. >> it is day four and it strikes me there will be many, many more of these to come in various news during this administration. thank you for your time, norm eisen. >> thanks, chris. >> coming up, how the women's march on washington turned into a global phenomenon, taking over cities all around the world. will be here to talk about women's right in the trump era. ahead, plus a bizarre state of emergency is tonight's thing to starting after this break.
one tonight, this past november election day on the day donald trump was elected president, voters in south dakota passed an interesting new law, the anti-corruption act called measure 22 which made extensive changes to the state's campaign finance and ethics law. the initiative approved by 51.6% of voters lowers contribution amounts for statewide legislative or county offices. it imposes limits on contributions from candidate campaign committees, political action committees and parties. it creates a publicly funded finance program for campaigns who choose to participate and agree on limits to expenditures. even has an ethics commission to administer the public program. prohibits certain state officials and employees from lobbying until two years after leaving government, and places limits on lobbyists with staff members.
it is a swamp draining measure approved by voters in a red state that overwhelmingly supported donald trump's campaign against insider politics. you might ask how has the republican led legislature of south dakota responded? they're declaring a state of emergency. i'm not kidding. that too in 60 seconds.
so south dakota voters in a ballot initiative approved an anti-corruption initiative on election day to overhaul campaign finance andeth iics in their state government, which ranked 47th in the nation for integrity in the center for public integrity assessment in 2015. republican law makes were not pleased with the new rule imposed by their voters. so much so they're planning to declare a state of emergency to repeal the initiative. it would allow the repeal to take effect immediately and deny voters their right for another vote on the measure through a veto referendum. for voters that wanted to drain
>> every tv doctor knows when it comes to hospital romances, the it is believed to be the largest coordinated protest in the history of the american republic. it appears as of now one out of every 100 americans was in the streets on saturday in protest on the first full day of the trump presidency. crowd estimate not an exact science, but with a kaushts approach it was estimated at 5.3 million. >> ladies and gentlemen, are we here! are you ready to march? say yes! >> it's been a heart wrerchling time to be a woman and immigrant in this country. our dignity, our character, our rights have all been under attack. >> you can count on me! your palestinian muslim sister to keep her voice loud, keep her
feet on the streets, keep my head held high! >> this is an out pouring of energy and true democracy like i have never seen in my very long life. >> those last two speakers will be joining me at the desk head to. it wasn't just large crowds in large cities, it was 8,000 to 9,000 in lansing, michigan, 1,000 in fargo, north dakota, marching through the snow in downtown anchorage. all 50 states and countries around the world in the streets of paris, london and sydney. it was organized by women and called a women's march in rebuke to the president. donald trump reinstated the global gag rule. the president as you note in the photo surrounded by men, banning federal funding for any organization anywhere in the world that discusses abortion as part of family planning council. joaning me cecile richard, president of planned parenthood federation of america. thank you for being here. at some level you have to see it
coming, this is how it has gone. clinton got rid of the global gag rule, reinstated by george w. bush, rescinded by barack obama, reinstated by donald trump. this is part of what comes with having a republican president. >> i think there's two things different though. one, of course, it happened first day in office after, as you say, the largest women's martha happened in our history. the second is this gag rule and actually what was signed by president trump today is so much more expansive than anything we have ever seen, because this actually impacts hiv/aids programs, maternal health programs. it litally will mean shutting down programs all around the world that provide far more than family planning, and it is the results will be devastating. >> this actually goes out past what was operational during the bush administration? >> absolutely. >> how so? >> it expands beyond family planning services. >> any organization, not just ones doing family planning? >> it includes programs doing
now hiv/aids programs, programs that are doing zika programs, maternal health programs. and this is so disturbing, of course, because we have made so much progress over the last eight years, chris, in reducing maternal mortality from unsafe abortions, in fact cut the rate in two-thirds. >> really? >> absolutely. during this last period, in the eight years of president obama because of better family planning access, we've made huge progress in the u.s. but we made huge progress globally. >> i didn't know that. >> this is such a turn to the right, and, again, women are going to suffer and thousands of programs around the globe will suffer as a result. >> mary simms international, one of the biggest family planning partners, they estimate it will lead to an additional 2.2 million abortions worldwide, meaning there will be more abortions because groups that would counsel women and find different alternatives for them if they're in the midst of pregnancy will not be able to do any of that and that will lead to more abortions.
>> absolutely. i an this is what we're sang too in the u.s., to use this example. we now have 55 million women under obamacare that get coverage for family planning, and they can go to planned parenthood, they can go to other providers. we have the lowest -- we had the lowest unintended pregnancy rate in 30 years, the lowest teenage pregnancy rate in our entire history in the u.s. if you want to increase unintended pregnancy and the need for abortions, you should do these kind of programs. it is crazy. >> abortions themselves have been on decline along with that, in the united states. >> absolutely. it is connect eminent domain. if you help women get better family planning, better access at lower cost or no cost, then women can actually get birth control and prevent an unintended pregnancy. this is basic women's healthcare. i think that's part of what you saw women marching in the street about on saturday. >> this -- what does it say to you about the direction of this administration? >> well, it is very disturbing they would do something even so
much more extreme than anything that happened under president bush. i don't even know if they fully understand the impact on women's lives around the globe. of course, it is a cautionary tale because, as you say, it is only going to increase women who die from unsafe abortions and is going to increase unintended pregnancy across the world. i don't think that's -- it is not what the american people want. obviously, as you said earlier, chris, this president was elected because he was going to create jobs for people and drain the swamp. yet this is what he does first day in office. >> cecile richards, thanks for your time. appreciate it. >> as i mentioned, stick around, gloria steinem here to talk about how to translate the enormous, in fact truly turnout this weekend into sustained political action. don't go away.
kind, where does it go now. national co-chair of the wep's march on washington, gloria steinem. linda, let me start with you. as someone who was one of the organizers of this, were you surprised by the turnout? >> i was extremely overwhelmed, as much as i knew there were people talking about it. but to come to washington d.c. and not be able to see the end of the mark and then watch on twitter chicago, l.a., anchorage, alaska. helena, montana, fargo, north dakota. >> everywhere. the womecame and showed up and we are showing our power. >> why? you are an organizer and i want anyone watching this who has never tried to organize anything like this to know that it is really harder than it looks. i can say that knowing, having come from a family of organizers. what is your understanding of why it exceeded expectations in terms of turnout? >> because we were able to speak
to the value of people. we came together in solidarity to stand with the most marginalized people. we were also -- people found an entry point. it was not just about reproductive right but climate injustice and racial injustice and immigrant rights. we diversified the leadership, three of the national cochairs, a many would of color of the most directed impacted communities, black, latina, black and muslim women. we were speaking to people's inner frustrations. we are as devastated as people are with the current election results we had. we went from friday devastation to saturday inspiration, motivation and gal vanization. >> gloria, you obviously have been through marches and have a tremendous career in activism. >> nothing like this. i have had a very long life. >> i was going to ask you. >> i have never seen anything that is as contagious. it is partly the web, but this
was the perfect use of the web because it was people showing up in person, not just pressing send. and all over the world. i mean i was getting calls from berlin where they said, we want you to know. they had a huge rally in berlin. >> yes, they did. >> we want you to know that walls do not work. i mean it was -- i have never seen anything this big and contagious. >> there's a question. i went to watch the march in new york because i was curious to see who would come out and what it would look like. my first thought was the last time i had seen like that in new york was march of 2003 when there was a huge anti-iraq war march. there was huge turnout, enormous. >> i remember. >> but ultimately, politically that did not stop the warner act. so the question a lot of people have, okay, huge turnout for the march, how do you understand this building political power? >> this was just the beginning of a building an infrastructure that's going to complement the work done by many organizations and many groups. these women that came out to march with their family, they're ready to act. they want to know what is next.
and we had 400 organizers across the country that helped put on sister marches. we are meeting tomorrow morning 10:30 a.m. because we have a plan. >> all of those organizers? >> well, first the national steering committee. >> right. >> and then getting together with national organizers, and we are coming, chris. we are organized. we have vision. you saw what we were able to do in less than eight weeks. we organized 600 marches across the world. to have 1.2 million people in washington d.c. that came out in solidarity to stand together is absolutely remarkable. we are not just a march, and we are going to go sit home. we have work to do, and our women are ready to do that work. >> it struck me a lot of the signs, they were about all different kinds of issues and it was interesting to see that, but a lot of signs about the infamous comments the president of the united states made on the "access hollywood" tape. one of the things striking to me when he bragged about sexual assault, how easy it was to get away with it when you're a celebrity. there was a moment where you had republican politicians running to say i can't look my daughter
in the eyes about this. >> it didn't disappear. how people felt, women felt, men on behalf of women felt sexually assaulted by his language and his attitude. there's a common theme here, bodily integrity. the power of the government stops at our skins, and that has to do with reproductive freedom, with sexual assault. it has to do with all kinds of other issues, with testing and so on. i mean it is fundamental bodily integrity, and i think that's what his ridiculous attitude tapped into. >> what do you say to people that are saying -- i thought it was an interesting piece, i
thought in "the washington post," that went out to rural areas deep in trump country that said about the marginallism, i don't know, i haven't heard of it. folks who say it is rallying or preaching to the choir, what do you say to that? >> the aerial shots speak for themselves. it is the largest protest in u.s. history. we made history here in 2017. we created a beloved community. we had had no arrests anywhere around the country during these protests. these are people that came out with families. they're against this new administration. they're prepared to stand against this administration, and they're prepared to stand with the most marginalized communities. the fact that they agree to follow women of color leading this march, putting out message on race and class and immigration and they still showed up, that tells me something. >> i want to ask you before i go to you, gloria, you were the target of some sort of attacks today, people accusing you of being anti-semitic. i think it is a preposterous image of you holding up the finger one and claiming it was somehow related to isis in some way. do you want to respond to those? do you want to say something to
the folks saying you were out of the mainstream where you have hateful views? >> i think about history and what gives me solace is every effective organizers and leader in history has been vilified, and now the right wing is coordinating attacks against those they see that can mobilize and resonate with the marches. i am proud of the movement i have been a part of. i'm not afraid of the right wing and the attacks. anyone who does simple research know these people and who they are. they are all trump supporters. >> i will testify to the fact i have seen you work across every religion, ethnicity and denomination in the time i have known you. >> i supported the first jewish man for president about, for god's sakes. come on, people. >> gloria, there is a big fight on the less about class and identity politics. to me a little bit of the proof was in the pudding at this march. whatever was happening there, seems like it is working, and it also seemed to me to kind of transcend the intra murals debates we have seen. >> of course it does. it sort of drove me crazy people were saying -- the "new york
times," why was the women's march concerned about racism? are you kidding me? you know, wherever there is race or caste as in india or class, that means you have to control reproduction in the long-term and who has children with whom in order to perpetuate it. there's no such thing as being a feminist without being an anti-racist and vice versa. >> all right. those images we saw were amazing. it is really an amazing thing that happened from just a news -- >> i want to say i'm a supporter. i was not an organizer. linda -- >> right, very clear about who is organizers are. that is all for this evening. the rachel maddow shows starts now. good evening. good evening. >> thanks, my friend. thanks to you at hope for joining us. happy monday. in 2008 at anderson air force base in g juan there was a military training flight that went bad and we have footage of it.
it is a strange looking plane. it is a b-2 stealth bomber. you see it goes down the runway and takes off and all is -- all is well with that initial plane, that initial takeoff. that is what it is supposed to look like. but then immediately thereafter there's a second b-2 bomber that will be taking part in the same training exercise. the second follows, makes its way down the runway, starts off fine. is as soon as it is airborne you can tell, even if you don't know anything about airplanes, you can tell having seen the previous plane take off normally with the second one the takeoff trajectory seems wrong. the plane pulls up at what is clearly a wrong angle. the pilot tries to correct but the plane starts to come back down and boom, ultimately the plane drags its wing and you see it explode. this was a b-2 bomber. a b-2 has a crew of just two people. these are big planes but they