tv Hardball With Chris Matthews MSNBC April 18, 2017 11:30pm-12:01am PDT
and lies and fake news are getting such wides strugsdiscussion and circulation, i know you're reluctant to criticize your colleagues in the navy except for one football game each year, this doesn't look good, general. >> no. you're right. there's an element of keystone kops to all of this. a couple of observations may be helpful. the usa navy knows where every ship in the global surface fleet is intan taken yusly 24 hours a day. there's no question about that. it's all on an electronic grid worldwide system. second observation, when you send a carrier battle group they don't steam along the shore three miles out from the beach. they're out there as a presence. normally, we announce them. the dmoirkians can't follow anything at sea. i think what happened was the administration canceled the australian deployment but picked up the maneuvers that were close to where the ship was and then
they said, look, we're getting the same threat out of it. one other observation, what it tells you is there was never the slightest intention of flying carrier strike aircraft into north korea to take out their missiles or nukes, which most of us have been saying for the last two weeks. >> true. and yet, jeremy, we talked about the possibility because we heard the president in real time talk about this armada clearly aimed at north korea. we reported it as fact. so did every news organization we saw, including the new york times, which has now published this different version of events. the armada comment got wide circulation. >> the armada comment was on april 12. it turns out that an april 12, the carl vinson carrier strike group was 3500 miles away from the crane peninsula. it's like saying a ship off the coast of san diego is headed to
new york. i mean, it's just -- it's not even remotely true. i think one of the reasons why the president made that statement incorrectly was that the president, i'm told, was not consulted at all about the movement of the carl vinson carry strike group. this was a decision made by pacific command by admiral harris and the white house only found out about it when the navy issued its press release. the president in effect was taking credit for a muscular move that he played actually no role in deciding. >> barry, this is when i ask you about the new and developing relationship between a political novice who is now commander in chief of all u.s. military forces and a standing military, jeremy's old shop at the pentagon, which is a force unto ite h itself. >> it's going to be a very difficult period. there's no question about it. i think the good news is, look,
the secretary general jim mattis, an stable guy, the armed forces woreships him. we've got gd guy on the ground in korea, vince brooks, army four star, so i think the military leadership's going to be just fine. the question is how do you govern a country when you've got the president tweeting these outrageous changes in foreign policy, defense policy on a daily basis? i think the pentagon must be confused and worried. >> and jeremy, this all comes under the kind of overall banner of transparency. as recently as a week ago we learned about something as localized as white house vichtdor logs, but you have for some time seen a larger meaning and a larger danger in not making those public. >> well, the white house invoked national security reasons for not making those white house visitor logs public as they had been made in the obama administration. i've been trying to talk to people and trying to figure out
what national security purpose or intelligence rational could there be. i've come up empty, brian. i cannot find a single national security rational. if there's one or two or a set of people who go to the white house, whose identities we need to mask, there's a process in place, tlk be a process in place for with hold that from the public, but on the grounds, this looks like an effort to side stem transparency. >> gentlemen, thank you for aejszing the caught and staying up late with us tonight. another break. coming up, the book every political junky is getting their hands on. new details on the presidential campaign everyone thought it was a sure campaign but instead went down in defeat when the 11th hour continues. es, 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.
little girls and everyone in between. i'm happy for boys and men, because when any barrier falls in america, it clears the way for everyone. [ cheers and applause ] after all, when there are no ceilings, the sky's the limit. [ cheers and applause ] >> our producer just said it feels like a hundred years ago and doesn't it? and we realize that a lot of our democratic viewers have a hard time seeing that again. welcome back to the # 1th hour. here's a question. was it bad timing? a flawed candidate, espionage, hubris or poor organization that led hillary clinton to defeat last november or some combination of the above? the new book "shattered: inside hillary clinton's doomed
campaign" reveals new details. with over 100 sources, the arthurs describe a candidate determined not to repeat the mistakes of her 2008 campaign and yet somehow doomed to recent them. here is how the authors describe it. with the president placing a consolation phone call, the reality and dimensions of her defeat hit hillary clinton all at once. she had let him down. she had let herself down. she had let her party down and she had let her country down. her dreams laid shattered at donald trump's feet. reluctantly she rose from the seat and took the phone. mr. president, she said, i'm sorry. the authors are here with us
tonight. congratulations to you both. a project of this sides is a huchblg undertaking. >> thank you. >> first of all, a question about ground rules. you got incredible access. what was the deal with those around you in the heat of battle about what their quotes were going to be used for and as? >> we wanted to get the most accurate, the most candid story, so we reached an agreement with the highest levels of the campaign early on that we wouldn't use anything before the election ended and we would only use it on background. for the most part i think we got a pretty accurate picture of what was happening inside the campaign. >> everyone has their moment when they knew election night was going to be different than the plot line a lot of people expected. for us, it was having james carve el on the air with us and when he started to realize this meant virginia, florida, he
physically became ashen and he became -- his mood went dark. that's when we knew. what can you share about us about what it was like on the inside that night? >> it's interesting. the first signed of trouble were florida early in the night. >> oh, man. >> they see what's going on there. in particular there were a couple of people, craig smith, one of plenty p president plaent clinton's oldest aides and allies, they kept calling people and saying this doesn't look good, this doesn't look right. ultimately, they saw that they were going to lose in florida. then question was, is what we're seeing in florida, is the change in republican and democratic strength in some of these areas in florida, is that going to be extrapolated out to north carolina? will it be the same in rural parts of pennsylvania and suburban parts of pennsylvania,
michigan, wisconsin? there was a sinking feeling pretty early on that there was a good chance that that was going to happen but they had to wait and watch while this went . hillary clinton was pretty stoic during the night. that loss iflora, even though it didn't mean that they were going to lose the election, where they were losing and the way in which they were losing really sort of early on set the tone. it never got much better. the end of the book is a blow bby blow of what went on from the hotel where hillary clinton was that night all the way through to the phone call to president trump. >> the setting, the glass ceiling that was a metaphor at the vav its center, even the lectern in the middle of the giant stage shaped like the united states. the structure full of mostly young campaign volunteers,
victory was so clearly in the air early on that evening and their faces changed on live television as watched. amy, i posed the question at the start of this segment, was it bad timing, a flawed candidate, espionage, hubris, or poor organization or a combination of all of them? >> i think all of the above, brian. here's why. i think she didn't have a message. we detail in the book pretty -- we give you a tick-tock of how the -- from the very beginning her launch speech went awry. she had 20 people working on the speech instead of just the principle usually and the speechwriter. you already had warring factions. they couldn't decide what the message was, what the center of gravity was. this was her moment to say, to lay the groundwork and say this was what she was about. she didn't do that properly. then it kept going. it was -- you know, these warring factions.
there was in fighting at the top. the top two political advisors, john podesta and robby hook didn't get along. one didn't trust if other. there were other accounts lower down the level where -- lower down the line where people were in fighting and they didn't quite know how to get access to secretary clinton. so and then there's -- there are image problems and e-mail problems and all of this sort of coupled with russia and comey kind of built the big picture of highway she lost. >> i want to read two quotes. number one, in her view, it was up to the people she paid top find the right message for her. a construction deeply add odds with the way sanders and trump built their campaigns around their own gut feelings about where to lead the country. this next quote. around the nevada caucus time she tells a friend, i don't understand what's happening with the country. i can't get my arms around it.
how do i get answers to this? jonathan, how could she not have a tactile feel for politics after so many years in politics? a fair question. >> it's a very fair question. and bernie sanders had that tactile feel for the rise in populism in the country. >> the current president did. >> the current president certainly has that. this is something she wasn't able to grasp. her whole life she's been somebody who believes that you make change by working inside the system. this is something we saw in the 2008 election, whether it was martin luther king the outsider or lyndon johnson, the president who made the big ellis difference in civil rights law. this is somebody who really truly believes that in the establishment, and up think people saw that about her, that she was representing the establishment andst status quo.
donald trump's argument was the exact option, he was as disrupter, somebody who was going to bring change. she just couldn't -- these are her words -- couldn't wrap her mind around what was going on in the election trat, that desire to change somuch that antipathy for anything that was a part of the system orst establishment, she just -- it wasn't just that moment iegt after new hampshire where she said that. there were other times she expressed that, she didn't have that feel. i think she's somebody who understands legislative tactics very well but not that natural politician, not her husband that goes out, talks to an audience, tells them a little bit of what they want to hear. >> yeah. >> -- to get them to trust him, at least in the moment. you know, not barack obama with the mass charisma or george w. bush with the mass charisma. and she knew it at some level. >> let's fit in a break and
. i know, i know we have still not shattered that highest and hardest glass ceiling but some day, someone will and hopefully sooner than we might think right now. [ cheers and applause ] and to all the little girls who are watching this, never doubt that you are valuable and powerful and deserving of every chance and opportunity in this world to pursue and achieve your own dreams. >> hillary clinton in her concession speech the morning of november 9. we're back with the authors of the new book "shattered" for an inside story of what went into
that speech. how do you do that as a politician who has just suffered this spectacular co lied scopic loss? >> there was a difference in the room. there were some aides who wanted her to go out in fighting mode and reiterate what she had been saying in campaign mode, that donald trump wasn't the right person, attackling him. there were others who wanted her to do what she did and be a little bit above -- you know, a little gracious, a little more gracious and i think those people obviously won out. but there was this kind of division there and it was interesting to see how it all played out. we kind of take you through that in the book. >> she even went out the next morning -- they worked on this after she had conceded wee hours of the morning. she told her team to go back to the drawing board and then, you know, very early the next morning before she went out to give the concession speech she
had some instructions for them. one of the things she'd done is she'd drawn a circle with the cross -- the sign for female -- in the margin. she wanted them to say that thing about little girls. knowing that they're vaed. i think this is somebody who it was hard not to have sympathy for somebody who's been trying to achieve this goal for a long time and denied in 2008 and denied again in 2016. >> people say this was the most powerful speech she gave in the campaign. that it actually struck the right tone. it was perfect. >> except for the timing. >> except for the timing. >> what do you do about the x factor in the book, the millions of democrats who will believe that russia had its fingers on the scale of our our election, that this was down to 84 votes in battle ground states, still being litigated in the streets of our country.
it's going to be litigated in washington, d.c. how do you deal with that in instant history? >> i think you read the words. we're telling the story of the people who knew her inside the campaign. we didn't talk to many outsiders. this is their story. this is something that they wanted out there. it's very easy to deflect and say that this is all russia and this is all comey. i think as john and i said earlier, it's part of that story and that narrative. i think her campaign was much more flawed as we detail in this book. all you have to do is basically read these words in these chapters and that will obviously play out. >> it's important to remember a couple of things looking at these questions. number one, with comey, that letter at the end, this is still related to the amendment issue. while jim comey did not have a prosecutable crime that he could go after, i don't think there were very many people that would say her setting up the server
outside the state system was a good call. if you look at the stuff about russia, we're learning more about that now. but we knew a fair amount about it before the legal conclusion and she talked about it in the debates. she talked about donald trump -- she called him a russian puppet, 17 intelligence agencies had told us all that russians were trying to influence the election, particularly hacking into the dnc servers. the thing you never hear about democrats is any talk about the obama care price spikes that consumerers were made aware of right before that comey letter. i think it's hard to disaggregate all those things. a change in any one of these things could have tipped the balance. i think one of the questions you have to ask is if one fifth of donald trump voters thought he was unfit, wouldn't they have been available to her? >> the vr this is a piece of
decline journalism, a piece of instant history. both of those are fraught but the readers and orderers of the book seem to think early on you've gotten it right. clagss with this piece of work. thank you very much for coming on our broadcast. >> thank you, brian. >> you will not mind if we take a look at some instant history. this is osoff at the podium in georgia. let's listen? >> this is already a victory for the ages. [ cheers and applause ] that no matter what the outcome is tonight, whether we take it all or whether we fight on, we have defied the odds, we have shattered expectations. [ cheers and applause ]
we are change wiing the world. and your voices are going to ring out across this state and across this country. we will be ready to fightn and win in june if it is necessary. and there is no amount of dark money, super pac, negative advertising that can overcome real grass roots energy like this. [ cheers and applause ] so bring it on [ cheers and applause ] because we are courageous, we are humble,ened we know how to fight.
this is not a story about me. this is a story about this community at this moment in history. this is a story about women in this community. [ cheers and applause ] those strong and determined women who have picked us all up. who are carrying us forward, who are going to carry us to victory tonight or in june. so for all of you who have been hounding the pavement, knocking on doors, making phone calls, and there are thousands of you and there will be thousands m e
more. thank you. this is -- this is the most inspiring team i've ever had the honor of being a part of. so for those of you who want to stick around, stick around. this is going to go on for a little bit longer. let's show what people power is all about. let's show what it means when we say that we have more in common than we have apart, that we reject fear and scapegoating and divisi division, that we choose to love one another and to make things happen and to win. thank you so much, everybody,
thank you. [ cheers and applause ] >> so as you heard, it's still going to be a long night in georgia. that was jon ossoff speaking to his reporters, quite candidly, trying to take some media time and attention here in the 11:00 p.m. hour on the east coast. casey is there in thecrowd. casey, while he was talking we updated the numbers here. i'm showing him at 48.6%. that was just kind of a status report from the podium, right? >> that's right, brian. he said there was no outcome tonight in this election, but he claims this was already aing victory for the ages. they are trying to say, look, he did much better here than was every expected of any democrat. this district has been held for decades by republicans and there's something of an expectation setting game going on between democrats and republics. they have set the bar that would have allowed him to win
outright. that's what would have given them best chance of winning that seat at all. it's going to be much tougher in june, brian. >> casey, thank you very much. the breaking story, the tonight on "all in." >> i have a little conflict of interest because i have a major, major building in istanbul. >> a presidential conflict of interest in the president's own words. >> i have a major, major building in istanbul. >> tonight, the jaw-dropping story of the president's support for a turkish strongman, and why it's a conflict of interest smoking gun. then as polls close in georgia -- >> hello, this is president donald trump. >> -- could the president's last-minute entry into tonight's big special election backfire? plus tom perez and senator bernie sanders on their tour to turn red stas