tv All In With Chris Hayes MSNBC June 21, 2017 5:00pm-6:01pm PDT
yet. they've been so intent to donald trump. to trump him with better ideas like how to improve obamacare. you figure out that one. i'm still struck with how he got his allegiance in the first place. and personal bad behavior to keep them. that's "hardball" for now. thank you for being with us. "all in" with chris hayes starts now. we can whimper about it, we can fight back. i'm fighting back. are you fighting back? >> just one day before the public finally gets to see the secret senate health care bill, the democratic resistance ramps up. >> fight this bill. >> it is outrageous. >> no hearing, no vote. >> we've got to be all in all the time. >> tonight, just what is in the bill? and what is the plan to stop it? plus, new details on russian
interference in the election. 21 state systems targeted while the white house still pre barricades. >> the one individual in america still seem the not accept this basic fact is the president of the united states. >> then the special counsel hits the hill. as republicans confront the investigation that into possible obstruction of justice. >> i think that everything is on the table. >> "all in" starts right now. good evening from new york. i'm chris hayes. hours before republicans are set to unveil finally a draft of their secret plan to overhaul american herring, the secret may be out. according to a draft in the bill obtained by the "washington post," senate republican there's propose a bill that tracks very closely to the same house bill that the president called mean and cold hearted, and that is polling at 17%. the post reports the senate bill largely mirrors the house america that you are narrowly passed last month, but with some
significant changes crucially. while the senate proposal cuts off medicaid expansion more gradually than the house bill. it would enact deeper cuts for low income americans. mitch mcconnell will release it tomorrow at 9:30 a.m. during a closed door meeting with only republican senators. most of whom have not seen the bill themselves. even though it has been circulated among washington lobbyists. by monday, senate republicans expect to get a cbo score that will indicate among other things how many americans would lose coverage in exchange for the massive tax cut for the nation's wealthiest households. sometime after that, they plan to vote in an unprecedented time line to remake 1/6 of the economy. the white house says president trump who is about to hold a rally in cedar ram i hads iowa.
the gazette won with tens of thousands of iowans worried, now is not the time for a rally. we haven't seen anything resellbling a terrific plan. behind closed doors, the president described the house bill whose passage he celebrated as mean, cold hearted and son of a b. in march the president admitted the house version would hurt his own voterers but argued the senate would fix everything. >> a bloomberg analysis showed that xoinlts voted for you, class families works do far less well under this bill. >> i know. >> it seems like this is inconsistent with the message of the last election. >> a lot of things are inconsistent. these will be negotiated. we have to go to the senate. we'll see what happens in the senate. >> it appears at least if some ways, the senate bill will be even meaner, as the president
would say, than house version. in front of the capitol, they rallied against the push and promise ad vigorous push of the senate bill. >> we have a very simple message. no hearing no, vote. >> we've only got a few days left. we have to stop this bill. >> we can whimper about it, we can whine about it or we can fight back. i'm fighting back. are you fighting back in. >> our job is not to throw 23 million more americans off health insurance. it is to guarantee health care to all as a right. >> i don't think they have the votes yet. they might get them. but we are going to lie down on the train tracks if that's what it takes to stop this from happening in this country. >> at this hour, steve bannon and other white house officials are at the capitol trying to sell senators on the senate bill. i'm joined now by brian shoths of hawaii.
senator, i guess my first question is, do you have reaction? have you seen any of the bill? do you know what's in it yet? >> no. i don't know what's in it but i've seen the reporting and it confirms what we've been saying all along. the house bill and the senate bill are essentially the same structurally. this thing cuts medicaid massively. it may phase out medicaid expansion a little more slowly. i'm not sure if they think that gives them cover or not. what i does is something even more draconian. even more right bing used to be totally a third rail in american politics. which is, they're trying to cut medicaid overall as a program. they're trying block grant it which means, giving each state a certain amount of money, cap tating it and saying this is what you have regardless of how many people are on medicaid and how much money each state has. so this is extremely cruel. i'm a little surprised in the fight between the so-called
moderates and the right wing in the senate republican conference, that the right wing won. they got their wishes. this is paul ryan in college around a keg, imagining a bill. this is that bill. >> yeah. paul ryan had made this comment earlier that it was something that he dreamed about sitting around kegs in college. the other question i have for you is, how do you game out the next week as a member of the democratic minority? >> well, it is in two or three increments. the first increment we have to be focused on just one task which is to find three no votes. there's a lot of gaming out the end of the process. but that is fond we lose. and it is not a foregone could not xloogs we lose. i will tell that you the rumors are flying. and they're flying in every direction. even the most knowledgeable people within the united states senate.
some people think there are seven or eight people leaning no. some people think mitch mcconnell already has the votes. that tells me this is a very fluid sbags lots of members are feeling tons of pressure and we should ratchet up that pressure. i'm trying to do everything i can. on the floor, off the floor. directly with republican members. through the media, through the internet. and i think everyone has to do everything they can, to find three people who will vote no. and they may vote no for different reasons. they may have a pro-choice who vote no for that reason. there may be people like rand paul who think it isn't cruel enough. we have to cobble together three no votes and we can safe health care for tens of millions of americans. >> it seems a likely scenario and i would like to know what you think of it. that they have sort of left some obvious things in the bill that
moderates won't like. he there can be some victory on medicaid and rand paul, mike lee, maybe on the subsidies. and then he everyone can sort of, it seems to me it is set up for a today bokabuki theater. >> that's a heck of a thing to orchestrate. the senate is not quite that organized. even on the republican side. even with mitch mcconnell who is very skillful in his work. that may be how it is set up and i think you're right generally speaking. that what they're going to try to do is give some members cover. those who pretend to care about opioids but want to cut medicaid in $800 billion. maybe they'll set up a $10 billion opioid fund. 10% of what is really needed. so i think they'll try sweeten the pot for these members. a lot of them are more serious.
and the other part of the politics is home town politics. it is not enough to say i voted for open yoilds. we are hearing from community health centers, for group that's advocate for treatment for specific diseases. and people are feeling the pressure. don't give up. we're in a very strong position. we don't know what will happen. but we think we might be able to kill this bill. >> thank you for joining me. >> and joining me, republican congressman burgess, you are one of the people who worked on the aca in the house and i remember he, rand paul came over from the senate. and sort of made fun of you with a copier. you wouldn't let him see the bill. he was poking fun at the secrecy of the house process. shouldn't you be there now?
>> can i say a couple things? first, it is good to be on with you again. it has been a little while since we've had a chance to converse on things. the other thing i need to say, it is a week after the terrible shooting at the baseball practice. i don't know if steve scalise watches your show but i know his condition was upgraded to fair west miss you, steve, if you're watching, speedy recovery and we'll see you back here in the halls of congress. we all say things from time to time. i don't know that that was particularly helpful on the part of the senator before when the house was working on their bill. i would not expect it would be helpful for me to behave in the same way so i probably won't do that. >> there's been a lot made through the process. continuing situational hypocrisy is part of work you've chosen. >> i used to be a student of
medical irony a long time ago. i've branched put into legislative irony. so i have the full gamut. >> i want to play this on the obama process. it was a year into it. >> take a listen. >> the white house has no interest in being transparent in this process because they have so much to hide about this bill. we probably have a day or two to look at the shell bill. a day or two to look at the phantom bill and no time see what's in the real reconciliation bill. my committee is completely bypassed this process. no respect for the oldest standing committee in the united states house of representatives. very difficult to do something with this much. >> that was after a year and there were, there have been committee hearings, amendments,
you were objecting to the way the process came together at the end. >> wasn't reconciliation process. it was the way the senate passed bill had come back to the house, where we could have no input. if anything changed, as you recall, if anything changes, it has to go back to the senate. they lost the senate seat along the way. he couldn't do anything else. >> everyone knew what it was. right now, as you and i are speaking -- >> can i -- can i correct you? that people do know. we've had a reconciliation bill in the process for over two years time. everyone knows what the moving parts are. >> congressman, almostfully, i do not have in front of me, i do not have legislative language. and there are lobbyist who's do. >> we read the bill in the commerce committee if you were watching. >> i'll talk the senate legislation that you voted on in a week. >> what you heard from the previous guest is that it will
likely track close to the house passed bill. the moving parts are pretty well defined by reconciliation process. do i wish we had 60 votes and we could do something in the senate like they did? of course i do. they ended with reconciliation. we'll be beginning with it. this is beginning of this process. not the end. so we know what the moving parts are. something with taxes, something with mandates, something with medicaid expansion. all. those will be part of the senate bill when it is released tomorrow. >> here's my question to you. i want to put aside the exchanges. there are problems, they're very clear. those are facts on the ground in many places. let's take it out of the equation. >> you can't. >> the two big parts -- >> you can though for this reason. to get back to your point about the budgetary implications, there are two big moving parts. the taxt cuts that will happen
for the wealthiest households. if you make a million dollars, you will get a $50,000 tax cut. and then $800 billion in medicaid cuts. when people look at that -- >> no. you keep doing. this it is not a cut in medicaid. there is a reduction in the growth of medicaid. but it is still going to grow faster than the population of the united states. we're actually implementing a policy bill clinton wanted in 1997. going back to paul ryan's college days, this was bill clinton's plan in 1997. he said give states the ability to put a cap on federal spending and don't make they will come crawling to the federal government to get permission. that was a per capita cap that bill clinton proposed. "the new york times" extolled the version of clinton's plan in 1997. >> congressman, i didn't extol it. whoever and stoled it in 1997, the point is the money has to
come from somewhere. if you're saying it is not a cut, there are $800 billion in immediate xad will come out. that is a budgetary necessity. otherwise it doesn't pass reconciliation muster. there will be $800 billion less going into people's health care through the program than there would be if you didn't pass the bill. their the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff said the single greatest threat to our security was our debt. and honestly, chris, you know this. there is something that will have to happen on spending control, deficit control, that is part of discussion that will be going on over the next several months. it is common sense. >> this is a common sense approach to the vast increase in the expenditures of medicaid. it will go from $550 billion a 84 to a trillion dollars a year in less than ten years time. but the country is not growing that fast. >> if that's true, and let me say, conceding that. you're concerned about the deficit and you want to rein in
the spending, why are there $600 billion in. at a cuts for people making lots of money including millionaires and billionaires who are receiving $50,000 a year added to their salary? >> well, here's the other part of the equation. the growth of the economy, the united states over the last seven years has been 1 to 1.5%. maybe some years, a little over that but not much. that is the other thing that has to change. you have to have growth of the economy of this country or we're stuck. we're mired in this stagnation and we'll never see the light of day. >> i always appreciate you coming. on let's keep doing this, congressman. i appreciate it. i will joined now by the senior correspondent, and josh earnest, former white house press secretary under president obama. i really do feel like they're being dishonest about what's going on in medicaid. it is true. the program will continue to expand. but it is a cut because there will be less money. i'm not crazy. >> you are not crazy. it is definitely a cut.
and i think it is a cut because a lot less people will be getting medicaid benefits. one of the key numbers from the last cbo report is that 14 million americans will no long he have medicaid. if you want to know about the cut, who is covered under the program. with the big changes being proposed in the house bill, it sounds like it will be quite similar in the senate bill, you can't cover the same number of people. it is true that clinton did endorse a per capita method like representative burgess was talking about, but one of the things is how quickly you growal of money for each person. and under the republican bill, it is a very small amount that states would be getting for each medicaid enrollee. >> the politics of this are in flux. what is your sense of how this will play out? it seems it is the riskiest part of whole process. >> we definitely have senate republican in addition position
where they're taking a huge risk. that risk is, they've been deployed a pretty cynical strategy to prevent people from understanding what they're voting on. the thing they haven't accounted for, after they cast the vote, people will have tough questions about what they voted. on here's the thing. this is not a theoretical exercise. we saw how this played out in the house. the house on this second time around when they were trying on repeal obamacare, did the same thing. they tried ram it through. they did ram it through without any hearings or even a cbo score hoping people wouldn't pay attention to what they were voting on. it turns out since they cast that vote, since they voted to repeal obamacare, it has only become less popular even among republicans. and those republican members of congress who are counting on the president of the united states to have their back and explaining and defending that vote, now he's out there calling the bill mean. so this does put them in a pretty tough position. >> it seems to me that the sort of high leverage approach of
mcconnell is keep it secret. drop it. push it through. it means that you're putting all the spotlight on it for this period of time. this can't grind in the back ground. they'll have to withstand that. >> right. at some the point it comes out of secret and you have to talk about it. there are a lot of reporters on capitol hill who have a lot of questions and we will see if they can weather the storm. one thing they've been, it is harder to write a stoir when you don't have the details of the bill. when we write about the aca process, you can't really do that now. i think there will be a week of intense focus. we have the vote that will likely happen on thursday. but i think it is still an open question of if we get there, or if we see something we saw in the house where there is a vote schedule pulled a few hours before. then a few months later they get the time to get it together and get something passed.
>> do you think we'll hear from president obama? >> i don't know if we'll hear from president obama. i think there is a chance that we'll hear something from him. there are a lot of democrats across the country and even some republicans who are disappointed in the outcome of the congressional race last night. but i home they're not feeling discouraged. because there's an opportunity for people across the country to make their voice heard. there are men's of congress, who are about to take a tough vote. after we get the details, there will be an opportunity for people across the country to weigh in and make their voices heard. and it is important for people to make their voices heard. there are a lot of people in counties who want to make their voices heard. there are still some cards to play here before we have to
settle up the score. and it will be interesting to see how it plays out. >> thank you both. >> still to come, even arrest the white house refused to semiit, we got new sinister details. will you be ready when the moment turns romantic? 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.
members of congress heard a chilling account of the russian interference in the election. an official at the department of homeland security confirmed publicly for the first time, election systems in 21 states were targeted by russian hackers. there's no evidence that any actual ballots were changed. but here's the thing. witnesses warn that hackers will be back. appearing before the house panel today, president obama's form he homeland security secretary jay johnson said he personally contacted the associated press before election day to review the security of their vote
counting. maintaining they wanted to avoid the appearance of political interference, and pointing to claim by then candidate trump the election would be rigged. johnson was unequivocal about who was responsible for the hacking and the urge ency of doing something about it. >> orchestrated cyber attacks on our nation for the purpose of affecteding our election. now the key question for the president and the congress is, what are we going to do to protect the american people and their democracy from this kind of thing in the future? >> testimony came 24 hours later. i'm joined now by michael isikoff. i saw your write up, there were a lot of stunning moments. to have it confirmed that
election voet vendors and the systems being targeted is really something. >> these are both fairly informative hearings that did advance the ball about what happened. the core issue of the russian interference in the election. i thought it was interesting that jay johnson made the point that he made two efforts to try to help out and protect security and was rebuffed both times. first by the dnc. he said he offered home lald security's assistance to the dnc when he learned of the hack and the dnc didn't accept the help. at that point, the fbi was investigating. and then when he has this conference call with state election officials on august 15th of last year, he wants to get their support for designating state voting systems. part of the critical infrastructure that would trigger beefed up federal
protections, and he gets this blowback, pushback from the state election officials. they don't want it. they fear a federal takeover of the election process. and he put the idea on a back burner. so as a result, two efforts about at this secretary of homeland security are both rebuffed during this russian cyber attack. >> and one of the takeaways from the hearing, not just johnson's testimony but other witnesses, these are systems very distributed. they're different vendors. different localities and different states. and they are penetratable. >> some people took solace in the fact to change outcome of an election would be extremely difficult. because the election system is so diffuse and run on state and local levels.
and multiple jurisdictions, thousands of jurisdictions. it doesn't take much to have an impact. if fact the russians got in the data bases, and they did in two states. illinois and arizona. in illinois, there was 76,000 voters whose information was compromised. all you have to do is change a few digits in those voter registration efforts and then people go to the polls and they couldn't, there would be confusion at the polls. now, that didn't happen. but the potential for real havoc is there. >> all right. thank you for your time. >> still to come, news sign that the mueller investigation is gaining momentum. and senator al franken on whether the attorney general is avoiding testifying in front of
there is no collusion, no communication. it's time to move on. what is bob mueller doing? i don't understand his role anymore. everyone has said there is nothing here. so the investigation should be ended immediately. the president's former campaign manager appeared on the president's favorite cable news show this morning extend the campaign against robert mueller's investigation. the president himself will be on the show later this week for his first on camera interview in over a month. while his allies are trying to undermine the investigation,
mueller's investigation appears to be picking up steal. he's been on a hiring spree. he is meeting with the acting director to ensure he has all the information and resources he needs. and he has been bheeg the investigative committees in congress to discuss staying out of each other's way. last week he met with the heads of the senate intelligence committee. yesterday, today, mueller is back on capitol hill. this time for a leading member of the intelligence committee. asked what they plan to discuss, senator grassley wouldn't rule anything out. >> there are some areas that i won't go into. he can't interfere with. probably he'll tell us that we can't interfere with. >> is obstruction one of those areas? possibly the president obstructing justice? >> i think everything is on the table. >> a member of the committee
senator al franken joins me next. thank you so much. thank you! so we're a go? yes! we got a yes! what does that mean for purchasing? purchase. let's do this. got it. book the flights! hai! si! si! ya! ya! ya! what does that mean for us? we can get stuff. what's it mean for shipping? ship the goods. you're a go! you got the green light. that means go! oh, yeah. start saying yes to your company's best ideas. we're gonna hit our launch date! (scream) thank you! goodbye! let us help with money and know-how, so you can get business done. american express open.
so you can get business done. there's nothing more than my vacation.me so when i need to book a hotel room, i want someone that makes it easy to find what i want. booking.com gets it. and with their price match, i know i'm getting the best price every time. now i can start relaxing even before the vacation begins. your summer vacation is very important. that's why booking.com has great offers up to 40% off now through july 4th. find great deals now at booking.com. booking.yeah!
we do know the russians interfered with the election and i can't believe that in the last five months, that sean spicer hasn't had that conversation. if they have nothing to hide, what they should be asking, what the president should be asking, what sessions should be asking, is how can we prevent this from happening again?
>> senator al franken on the russian interference on the presidential election. now had it seems to make the temptation to fire the man leading the investigation even greater. how confident is senator franken in robert mueller to investigate the possible collusion between russian government and the trump campaign. >> i'm very confident in him. i think he has the independence he needs unless the president does something like fire him. in which, and i don't think that is a, a tenable option for the president. but you never know. >> there's a nominee to replace james comey at the filibustebi. it seems to me it is an important position and we haven't had hearings. . it seems there is an insurance
members will want to get from him during that process. >> well, yes. we do want him. we have on the judiciary committee oversight on the committee. we would like to get the attorney general to appear before us again. again, we have oversight over the justice department, the attorney general is the head of that. and if he is appointing a new head of the fbi, we want to be having a hearing with him as well. >> is sessions just avoiding your committee now? >> i don't know. i think so. i don't know. we want him to appear before us. i certainly have some questions for him. >> there's new details today on the health care bill. you're one of the senators who was rallying today about the senate health care bill.
basically, in many almosts, it broadly is similar to the house bill despite there was all this noise made for months, that's just the house bill in the senate. we'll write it from scratch. that doesn't appear to be what's actually happened behind closed doors. >> i haven't seen it yet. that's what we're hearing. i want to see it before i make a judgment about how close it is. the house bill is unbelievably bad. it is unbelievably bad. it is 800 plus billion in cuts to medicaid. we had a shadow hearing today. democrats did. on rural health. we had a number of witnesses. this will be devastating to rural health care, hospitals would close, people, i'm co-chair of the rural health caucus. i've been around my state. people crying in roundtables.
their mother gets her home health care through medicaid. she would lose it. the woman speaking and her husband would not be able to take care of her mom. because they both work. this is, it would be a tragedy to adopt something, anything like the house bill. >> what is the plan here in terms of stopping it? it seems like, i'll always under clear what senators can and can't do. it seems like each individual senator is required to deny unanimous consent. it seems like he's playing "hardball" and he has to reconciliation on his side. >> you can deny unanimous consent. and that takes up a certain amount of time. but once that time has elapsed, then you move on.
so i don't think that is going to be, i think what we are going to do is defeat this. that's what we need to do. because if this bill is anything like was described, it is like the house bill. i can't see it getting 50 votes. i can't see susan collins voting for it. i can't see lisa murkowski, bill cassidy, a lot of people i can't see voting for this thing. >> senator al franken, thank you for joining me. >> thank you. >> still ahead, assessing the fallout for democrats in the wake of last night's special election. plus, a message from the queen in tonight's thing one, thing two, next. each my goals. so i liked when my doctor told me i may reach my blood sugar and a1c goals by activating what's within me with once-weekly trulicity. trulicity is not insulin.
it helps activate my body to do what it's supposed to do release its own insulin. trulicity responds when my blood sugar rises. i take it once a week, and it works 24/7. it comes in an easy-to-use pen and i may even lose a little weight. trulicity is a once-weekly injectable prescription medicine to improve blood sugar in adults with type 2 diabetes when used with diet and exercise. trulicity is not insulin. it should not be the first medicine to treat diabetes or for people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. do not take trulicity if you or a family member has had medullary thyroid cancer, if you've had multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if you are allergic to trulicity. stop trulicity and call your doctor right away if you have symptoms such as itching, rash, or trouble breathing; a lump or swelling in your neck; or severe pain in your stomach area. serious side effects may include pancreatitis, which can be fatal. taking trulicity with a sulfonylurea or insulin increases your risk for low blood sugar.
common side effects include nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, decreased appetite and indigestion. some side effects can lead to dehydration, which may make existing kidney problems worse. with trulicity, i click to activate what's within me. if you want help improving your a1c and blood sugar numbers with a non-insulin option, click to activate your within. ask your doctor about once-weekly trulicity. with a non-insulin option, click to activate your within. for their limited time their pespicy sausage. slogans johnsonville firecracker brats... [whistles] ...flavor. "whisssssstttllllllleeeeeee ...flavor."
support for the european union in the wake of brexit. >> my government's priorities to secure the best possible deal as the country leaves the european union. >> wasn't anything the queen said about brexit that raised eye you wro eyebrows, but rather what they wore. people started remark. the hat looks a lot like the e.u. flag. even the parliament's chief negotiator said clearly the european union still inspires some. aside from the queen's wardrobe, her speech did seem to snub one pro national, pro brexit leader. president trump. it's here, but it's going by fast. the opportunity of the year is back: the mercedes-benz summer event. get to your dealer today for incredible once-a-season offers,
and start firing up those grilles. lease the e300 for $569 a month at your local mercedes-benz dealer. mercedes-benz. the best or nothing. i know you worry i can't keep up with our weekly tee times. dear son, but i've been taking osteo bi-flex ease. it's 80% smaller but just as effective. which means you're in big trouble, son. improved joint comfort in seven days. osteo bi-flex ease. made to move. my mother was born in scotland. she respected and loved the queen shelf loved the ceremony
and the pomp. >> in president trump's first week in office, he accepted the queen's invitation and he seemed pretty excited with all the pomp and circumstances. in april, they said he insisted on a gold-plated carriage ride with the queen. t they lashed out in the immediate aftermath of a deadly terror attack earlier this month prompting calls within britain to cancel the visit. a week later, he said he would not come if there would be large scale protests. all of which brings us to today when the queen announced the opening of the new session. announcing state visits. >> prince phillip and i look forward to welcoming king philippe and the queen of spain on a state visit in july. >> following the speech, ten downing street said the absence
of mention of president trump said did not mean the visit was off but a date had not been fixed yet. the new new york. we are building new airports all across the state. the new new york. new roads and bridges. new mass transit. new business friendly environment. new lower taxes. and new university partnerships to grow the businesses of tomorrow today. learn more at esd.ny.gov tech: when you schedule with safelite autoglass, you get time for more life. this family wanted to keep the game going. son: hey mom, one more game? tech: with safelite, you get a text when we're on our way. you can see exactly when we'll arrive. mom: sure. bring it! tech: i'm micah with safelite. mom: thanks for coming, it's right over here. tech: giving you a few more minutes for what matters most. take care! family: bye! kids singing: safelite® repair, safelite® replace.
last week officer ymp anez who shot and killed an officer was acquitted of second degree manslaughter. the dash cam video which was seen by the jury has been released. in the car with castillo was his girlfriend and his 4-year-old daughter. what you're about to see is disturbing. >> hello, sir. >> how are you? >> the reason i pulled you over, your brake lights are out. you only have one activated, active brake light. your third brake light up here on the top. that will be out. do you have your license and insurance?
>> sir, i have to tell you, i do have a firearm on me. >> don't reach for it then. >> don't pull it out. don't pull it out. don't pull it out! don't -- >> oh, man. >> don't move! don't move! >> oh, my god! >> don't move, baby. >> get baby girl out of here. >> officer yanez was acquitted. according to the "washington post" study, there were nearly 1,000 fatal police shootings in 2017. and charges are only filed in about 1% of all the fatal police involved shootings of the convictions are even more rare. officer yanez had a trial by
peers and he had due process which is afforded rightfully to any police officer when that officer is charged with a crime. but due process is unequally distributed in this country and the truth is that it is not the reality for millions of reality for millions of people. it is very hard to look at that dash cam video and say that our fellow citizen got his due process.
tof. the race turning out a successful effort so far for the gop to keep the house even as the president posts a 36% approval rating. attempted to tie ossoff to comedienne kathy griffin to nancy pelosi. second, superpac money poured in. "new york times" estimates handel benefited from $18.2 million of spending by outside groups. and third, old-fashioned gerrymandering. its boundaries clearly were crafted to benefit republican candidates. joining me now to pick over this, michelle goldberg, who is in georgia, whose slate is titled more liberal tears. and author of "audacity," and a title that this might be the worst freakout ever. you were basically like, hey,
michelle's writing from the tears perspective, you're basically saying, stop crying, it's not so bad. what's your general read here? >> you have to adjust your point of view of what's going to happen for the party with everything that happens. in this election, it was worse for the democrats by a few points than they expected. but the whole run of special elections, the democrats have had, has been very positive for them, on average, as dave wasserman found for 538. the party has outperformed its partisan lean of its districts by eight points. now, if it could just keep on this eight-point improvement in november, which is a long way away, but if they can keep that up, at that pace they would win back the house pretty easily. so i think the data actually tell us, the democrats have done really well in these special elections. they haven't won them just because they're all in really heavily republican districts. but that's not the way the house map looks. it's a map that we have because these are republicans who are appointed in trump's administration. they weren't -- it's not some
cross-section of america. >> it's also, we should say, generally appointed because they thought they were safe seats. you don't give up a seat. you're generally appointing people you think you have a safe seat. you were down in that district. i'm so fascinated by this sort of culture war aspect. kathy griffin had nothing to do, she tweeted about it once and it was like, i kept seeing her pop up. >> the thing that breaks my heart about this is that there were so many first-time activists in this district. you know, women who had never been involved in a campaign before who worked their hearts out and kind of thought their neighbors were better than this. because at the end of the day, karen handel's campaign was just about stick it to the liberals, right? i never saw a single campaign that -- or single advertisement that said a single positive thing about karen handel. there was the john ossoff campaign and anti-jon ossoff campaign. they tried to tie him to the muslim terrorists, black bloc
anarchists. to the shooting of steve scalise. it was such a repulsive over-the-top campaign. i think what it proved is that even republicans who are very uncomfortable with donald trump, they hate liberals more. interesting to see online, even a lot of never-trump conservatives were celebrating karen handel's win. you know, ultimately they hate -- >> the thing that i think gets lost in all these races is the role that super pac money has played. it's like, oh, money doesn't matter anymore. but in races of this matter, there were those who played to ossoff, who raised a lot of money, but in all of these specials we've seen huge amounts of super pac money come in. they have to pay higher rates. but they don't have to fund raise. i think that's a taste of what we're going to see in 2018. >> i think that's right. ossoff certainly had enough money. there's a threshold question with money.
you have to have enough money to get your message out. and there's a principle of diminishing return. i think that will help the republicans a little bit, but i don't think that will be a huge factor. i think the democrats will have enough money to get their message out in most of these races. >> i also think that, to me, what was -- this cultural are resentment helps explain why they're plunging ahead with this health care bill. i think there's a calculation made by the republicans that their appeal is so detached from policy in certain ways, or even just like what is going to happen with this bill, that they can push the bill for their ideological or donor interest class for those reasons, and they can still get people to vote against basically kathy griffin. >> you know, some of the women who really moved me were women who had kids with special needs who are terrified about their kids growing up with preexisting conditions or lifetime caps. i met one woman with two children with hearing loss and two operations, and she split
with a lot of her friends in cha community because she couldn't believe their embrace of donald trump which seemed completely divorced from the needs of their children. and it's just because, you know, at the end of the day, they thought obamacare raised our premiums and they didn't really have a sense of what was coming at them with this new bill. >> that to me, jonathan, connects with something you've written about. ossoff did not lean into the hca. he was critical of it and it was a huge factor for volunteers. but it seems like it's going to have to be central for democrats in 2018. >> i think it's their strongest issue. republicans know it. i think that's why what the senate is going to do is delay and delay and delay of the implementations of these provisions so little of it takes effect in people's memory down the road. it's an awful bill. >> i really don't think -- i think that what you're going to
see develop, if they pass the thing, is even more catastrophic politically, ironically. i think the best thing for republicans is for it to die in the senate. >> right. one of the real heart breaks of this. one of the heartbreaks is this could have derailed this terrible bill. >> i don't think it's immensive if it did. thank you for joining me. that is all in for this evening. good evening, rachel. >> thanks, my friend. thanks to you at home for joining us this hour. there were apparently four hours of interviews all together, i will confess i have watched zero of those four hours. but i do keep watching the trailers every week to help myself decide if i might want to watch any of the interviews. turns out that that itself is newsworthy. because the new trailer for the newest hour of interviews,