tv All In With Chris Hayes MSNBC August 31, 2017 12:00am-1:00am PDT
in every town and city neighbors did anything they could to help each other out. here are just a few examples from just one town, natterland, texas. a group of people helped carry someone >> tonight on "all in." >> i don't want to be disappointed by congress, do you understand me? >> president trump on teleprompter and off his populist message. >> we have no choice. we must lower our taxes. >> tonight the ever shrinking power of this presidency. dan rather, maxine waters and. plus new developments on the
russia investigation and what trump voters think about their pick for president. >> why doesn't he just quit that tweeting. >> he just needs to learn to mind his ps and qs. >> he couldn't be any worse at achieving goals in politics. >> "all in" starts right now. good evening from new york. i'm chris hayes. we have breaking news just literally published a few minutes ago. we had a show we were going to give you and now we're giving you this because i think it's extremely significant. it's an article in politico that says that robert mueller who is special council investigating -- leading up the russia investigation is working with eric schneiderman who is the attorney general of the state of new york. the significance of that as he look at paul manafort's finances is that new york state crimes would not be covered by a presidential pardon. think about that for a second.
explain more on the phone with me the reporter who broke the story for politico, josh dossi. what have you learned? >> bob mueller and eric schneiderman have worked together a couple months ago sharing evidence, both looking at subpoenas, talking to each other at length and both of them escalating the strategy on paul manafort, the former campaign chairman of the trump campaign and a very prominent and loyal backer of the president. it's unclear right now whether that means state charges will be filed instead of federal charges but as you noted earlier on air, the president can pardon for federal crimes. he cannot pardon for state crimes. so if, let's say, eric schneiderman eventually brought charges against paul manafort, the president would be more hand tied than he would be in a federal case. >> i want to make this very clear for folks. what this -- the subtext here, what's implicit in this and perhaps explicit in your reporting is strategizing on the part of mueller and schneiderman about the possibility down the road of presidential pardons and
the fact, the possibility of a future pardon will likely affect man manafort's decision about whether he cooperates with investigators or not. >> we don't know for sure that the two of them have talked about pardon and the strategy. we do know earlier this summer that bob mueller approached eric schneiderman. the two of them have been working in concert. people close to manafort say that mueller has been pressuring him to cooperate. they showed up for a raid on his house, aggressive tactics to try to get him to cooperate. we know the president just used a presidential pardon on joe arpaio and said he would consider asserting that presidential pardon and he said no one could question that power. so a lot of it is more writing on the wall and key leaks on why
the cooperation is happening now and the strategy between the two men who have totally separate investigations but in some way they may dovetail here in the upcoming weeks and months. >> in terms of manafort and you mentioned this before, the amount of pressure he's under is enormous. fbi predawn raid on his house, his former business associates including his former attorney we just learned today being subpoenaed to appear before a grand jury. they are putting the screws to him unquestionably, right? >> certainly. 100%. that has accelerated in recent weeks. when you start talking to someone's family members at 6:00 a.m., that's a sign that pressure is escalating. it seems that both of the men, eric schneiderman and bob mueller have obtained significant evidence on paul manafort. we don't know if it's enough to bring charges but both have subpoenaed his business partners, have looked into his tax records, have, you know, dug
into his family history and offshore accounts. both of them have reams of evidence on paul manafort and by cooperating and joining forces, a, they're showing here's the evidence we have, here's the evidence you have, the prosecutors are talking about who to approach, how to approach them, and it seems inevitable that if president trump pardon paul manafort proactively or bob mueller and his team became convinced that president trump was going to pardon them, that a case could likely proceed in state court. >> one more thing on this because it seems like important context. you referred to eric schneiderman, of course he's a democrat, the attorney general in the state of new york. he's brought cases against donald trump in the past. i think president trump university was in his cross hairs. >> with a $25 million settlement. >> that came out of the case that schneiderman brought. give us a context for the way that donald trump feels about
eric schneiderman. all i could think about was when the president reads this he's going to flip his lid. >> president trump has attacked eric schneiderman, calling him a hack, a lightweight. he was in eric schneiderman's dominion and eric schneiderman was a thorn in his side. the president had refused to settle, had been deposed, all his associates and other people in the company, executives had been. ed subpoenaed. then he won the presidency and then they won for $20 million. so it was really a pretty monumental settlement for the president-elect ten days afterwards to have to give a $25 million settlement for potential freud charges at his university. so the two men have a very
checkered past to say the least. they've bickered publicly. schneiderman has disdain over his policy and some of his immigration rules. it's not two people who have love for each other to say the least. >> josh dossi, great reporting on your part. it makes things much clearer than they have been which isn't always the case as this story goes forward. thank you so much. that news comes amid the other big news in the ongoing trump russia story this week which is a revolution that president trump's personal lawyer, michael cone, sent an e-mail to vladimir putin's kremlin seeking help on a project to build a trump tower in moscow while trump was running for president. today kremlin has confirmed it received that e-mail from cohen although it does it did not respond. cohen says he discussed the trump tower deal with trump himself on three separate occasions and that trump signed a letter of intent for
development with the russian developer. in 2015 as trump was running for president and to many people oddly praising putin, trump associate felix sater was associating with vladimir putin. one e-mail reads, buddy, our boy can become president of the usa and we can engineer it. i will get all of putin's team to buy in on this. and also wrote to cohen the effect of, can you believe two guys from brooklyn are going to elect a president. remember, we only have a very, very small portion of the e-mails between sater and cohen so there must be some missing context here, right? why would two guys from brooklyn think that standing a building deal in moscow for trump would have anything to do with getting him elected for president, unless there was much more going on. we know that donald trump jr. met with a kremlin lawyer who had promised dirt on hillary clinton and tonight the financial times is reporting in another development in this case
that the lobbyist who was at that meeting, a former soviet army officer, has now given evidence under oath before a grand jury in the investigation. for a look at the significance of all these developments, i'm joined by navid jamali, and jill banks, one of the prosecutors in the watergate scandal. i want to go back and talk about josh's story with you, jill, for a moment. i should be clear that what schneiderman and mueller are gaming out is how to apply pressure in a way that would be immune from the dangle of a presidential pardon. watching this story, that has to be figuring in the thinking of everyone right now and as a former watergate prosecutor, i imagine you thought of that as well. >> i think it's a brilliant idea. i think it absolutely could work
because i believe that the abuse of the pardon power could actually amount to an obstruction of justice. i think the promise of a future pardon for anybody who has been involved in any wrongdoing and then the pardon of joe arpaio which sends the message to them, and don't worry, even though you lose your fifth amendment privilege when i pardon you, you don't have to cooperate. you can be in contempt of court and i'll pardon that toochlt. so i think that the only way to avoid the abuse of his pardon power is to bring state charges. so maybe he would calm down and he wouldn't do it, but i think that this is a wonderful development. >> navid, going back to the developing story on both the meeting and on the trump tower, i want to start on the trump tower facts that we've learned. from your experience, is it at all plausible, likely, possible that interactions happening between felix sater or michael
cohen and whoever is on the other side in russia are not being reported back to folks with connections to the kremlin or russian intelligence? >> no, the only way i can describe this is it was probably a swipe right for russian intelligence. it's the same thing with the fact that peskov said he didn't respond but i'm sure that he walked it over to moscow intelligence and they were all over this. clearly this was a signal to russia that the trump orbit is open for business and they're interested in a dialogue. that is all you need to start with russian intelligence, to start making these entries into that orbit. >> you know, what we have established so far based on the facts we know is this sort of dancing around each other. we've got the trump folks reaching out to russia in different avenues. first we have them on the trump
tower deal which has persisted longer than we previously knew. we have felix sater saying this will get our guy elected president. ra knock ash meshen testified before the grand jury. is it possible that the circling never went anywhere other than the circling? >> no. i think it did go somewhere. i think where it went was on the russian intelligence side and not this traditional mfa, the equivalent of the state department. in the case of the testimony, the slam dunk in front of the grand jury would have been if anyone who was in the meeting with don jr. would come out and say not so much what they said to don jr. but admit that they were tasked directly by the kremlin. because they're russian nationals doesn't mean they're russian officials. i do think that there is a link there. at the end of the day, one of the last things president obama
did before he left office was to throw out 35 russian spies and seize two intelligence compounds in the united states. i don't think that that was coincidence. i am sure there's a connection here, we just don't know about it publicly yet. >> jill, i want to ask you about another development that's happened. we now have reporting about subpoenas that have been issued for former manafort associates, one of whom is someone he worked with and one of whom is his former attorney. i'm not a lawyer but i was surprised to see that. my sense is that that is rare. what do you make of a subpoena for his former attorney? >> before i answer that, can i just add to what navid said
which is when you combine with all the lies and all of the misleading statements and all of the nondisclosure of meetings with the russians, when you take donald trump's statements, i have no interests in russia, i have no dealings there, i have no business there, nothing pending, it makes a difference in how you interpret what's going on now. it makes it look guilty. but to your question about manafort's lawyer, it is highly unusual. attorney/client privilege is sa sacrosanct. one, the lawyer could have been acting as a business adviser, much as michael cohen frequently did and then you don't have attorney/client privilege. it could be that they were plotting a crime and they're both guilty. it could also be that a third person was in the room. so there are some exceptions to the privilege that could explain why they're going after the lawyer. >> all right, thank you both for being with me tonight. joining me now, democratic congresswoman maxine waters who has been quite outspoken about the russia investigation. what do you make of the latest developments? >> well, i am not at all surprised. i have always anticipated that the dots would be connected, that certainly there was collusion and certainly that all of those allies around this president which i dubbed the kremlin clan have been in some way connected with putin and/or the kremlin and it's all about money.
i said a long time ago, follow the money, follow manafort. and i hope that our special council, mr. mueller, will get what was happening with manafort and the cyprus bank. i think there's big money laundering that's going on. i think it passed through that bank, and i do believe that mueller's on the right track. and i like the idea that he is talking with schneiderman and they're figuring out some things. i don't know what they are, but this president who in your face said, you mess with me, anybody that you try to indict or you try to criminalize, i'm going to pardon them and i'll show you just as i've done with joe
arpaio. so i like the idea that mueller is not frightened. he's not backing up. he is going to do his job. i'm excited. >> you think -- i just want to be clear when you said that he said in your face. your point is that you felt that what he was communicating with the arpaio pardon was that, that essentially he would be there to pardon people that might find themselves in the teeth of a criminal investigation? >> yes, that is correctly stated. i do believe it was a signal. i don't know what he said, how he said it, what he said, but i do believe he was sending a signal. >> do you anticipate there's one republican member of congress who is going to introduce legislation to restrict the mueller investigation, the funding for it to six months. do you think we will see
increased pressure from your colleagues across the aisle, republicans in congress, as there appear to be more developments in the mueller investigation to shut it down? >> well, i don't know but i think that's outrageous and ridiculous. he will not get away with it. as a matter of fact, i think that mueller has moved far enough now where they should be shaking in their boots. to come through with legislation that would limit mueller's ability to do his job is not going to be taken lightly. and i think that not only are democrats going to rise up against that, but i think some republicans will finally, finally get the guts and the nerves to resist that. >> congresswoman maxine waters of california, thank you, as always. >> you're welcome. this is not the time to go away. the great dan rather has been sitting here with me throughout this breaking news, will join us next, along with colonel wilkerson. hey allergy muddlers are you one sneeze away from being voted out of the carpool? try zyrtec® it's starts working hard at hour one and works twice as hard when you take it again the next day. stick with zyrtec® and muddle no more®. when only the best will do... one of a kind tempur-pedic
delivers. only tempur material precisely conforms to your weight, shape and temperature. it provides up to twice as much pressure relieving power, so you won't toss and turn. and tempur-pedic is the best at minimizing motion transfer from your partner. you'll wake up, feeling like a champion. now through september 17th, save up to $500 on select adjustable sets. find your exclusive retailer at tempurpedic.com
hey you've gotta see this. cno.n. alright, see you down there. mmm, fine. okay, what do we got? okay, watch this. do the thing we talked about. what do we say? it's going to be great. watch. remember what we were just saying? go irish! see that? yes! i'm gonna just go back to doing what i was doing. find your awesome with the xfinity x1 voice remote. as the august recess draws to a close and congress prepares to come back to washington next week the president of the united states is as ubiquitous as ever, but he also has less political capital than ever to spend down on what's left of his agenda. today he traveled to
springfield, missouri to talk about taxes. this is was the split screen on tv, juxtaposing the president's remarks with hurricane harvey. as more cities and towns in southeast texas faced catastrophic flooding from what is already the biggest rain storm in the history of the continental u.s. after visiting texas yesterday where he was briefed on relief efforts but did not meet with victims of the storm, today the president acknowledged the personal toll harvey has taken. the focus of his speech which he read from a teleprompter was the so-called tax reform, a big push to reset the agenda following the collapse of health care and the failure of his legislative achievement. the president hitting the road to sell the gop tax plan to the american people. there's just one problem. they don't have a tax plan. for weeks officials have been meeting to try and come up with a blueprint. as one tax analyst told
bloomberg this week, they're nowhere. the president was reduced to reading off a series of platitudes. >> we would like to bring our business tax rate down to 15% which would make our tax rate lower than most countries. we believe that ordinary americans know better than washington how to spend their own money, and we want to help them take home as much of their money as possible. when businesses compete for labor, your wages will go up. lower taxes on american business means higher wages for american workers. >> the white house had sought to frame the speech as seizing the populist mantle but at least one trump super fan wasn't buying it.
ann coulter tweeted wtf, why is donald trump back to tax cuts? has he been talking to speaker ryan again. and then, oh stop pretending this is about letting families keep more of their money. this is for wall street. the president's push for a tax overhaul comes at a time when his influence on capitol hill and over his own branch of the government is at a low point thanks in large part to the health care debacle and the fallout from charlottesville. the president's actual ability to impose his will seems dill initialled as not just the business leaders have abandoned him or republican lawmakers have begun to question his fitness for office, increasingly senior members of his own administration are contradicting, even overruling the president of the united states. first it was economic adviser gary cohen who said the administration has to do a better job condemning white nationalists. then it was secretary of state rex tillerson with a stunning assessment of the president's moral leadership. >> i don't believe anyone doubts the american people's values or the commitment of the american government or the government's
agencies to advancing those values and defending those values. >> and the president's values? >> the president speaks for himself, chris. >> today it was defense secretary james mattis' turn after the latest missile test by north korea. the president tweeted this morning, the u.s. has been talking to north korea and paying them extortion money for 25 years. talking is not the answer. asked about that comment today on a visit to south korea, mattis shot it down. >> the president this morning tweeted that talking isn't the answer. are we out of diplomatic solutions for north korea? >> no. we're never out of diplomatic solutions. we continue to work together, and the minister and i share a responsibility to provide for the protection of our nation, our population and our interests which is what we are here to discuss today. >> former cbs evening news anchor dan rather joins me now. we should note, he knows a thing or two about covering hurricanes, he was there from hurricane carla in 1961 from texas.
thank you for coming. >> thank you, chris. i want to make it clear, very much on my mind and in my heart is what's happening in houston and southeast texas and parts of louisiana. >> it has been, i have to say, one of the things that's been most remarkable is the just the sort of ad hoc flotilla of people that have used jet skis to small boats to big boats to kayaks to human chains to go out and it really does look like they've been doing most of the rescuing. it has essentially been the people of houston. >> well, this is very much a texas thing, not that it hasn't been done elsewhere in the country. what you've seen on the television screen hour after hour are examples of duty, honor, bravery. police officers trying to get to work. this has been, i think, the optics out of houston with the
mayor, mayor turner, and the police chief, has been about that duty, honor, bravery. when president trump came, the question is whether he could pick up on that, communicate that in some way. now, i'm not here to judge whether he did or didn't. each person will have to judge for themselves, but i think there's a very serious case to be made that although the president went, give him credit for that, didn't make any big mistakes, but he sort of came and went and ran the risk of seem irrelevant. this is part of the problem he's having with his presidency, whether he is all show and no go. or as they would say in texas,
all hat and no cattle, because he can't deliver. to the most important powers of the presidency are the power to persuade and the power to invoke fear. that's been shrinking with the early stages of the trump presidency. >> that's exactly what we saw on display in two ways, both on the tax speech and what we saw with mattis. on that mattis moment, the chain of command is clear. the commander-in-chief who is the democratly elected civilian of the armed forces. there's a question of who controls, whose policy controls. it's the president of the united states. here you have a situation where the president says one thing and the secretary of defense says, no, he's wrong, out in the open. >> his secretary of state on sunday said i'm not associating myself, in effect he said i'm not associating myself with what he said in charlottesville. >> have you ever seen that? >> no, i have not seen it and neither has anybody else. this is unique so much with the trump presidency. we have never had a first-term president get off to such a chaotic, unsteady start as this. the general pattern is the president is most popular when he first comes into office and then in the nature of things, his popularity declines. but what you're seeing with president trump and i think it's
very clear, chris, it's not a democrat or republican assessment. it's not a biased assessment. it's looking at what's happening here. donald trump is afraid. he's trying to exude power and strength. he's afraid of something that mueller and the prosecutors are going to find out. what you're seeing time after time is a president who is within himself seized with fear. that's going to be a political hurricane out there at sea for him. we'll call it hurricane vladimir, the whole russian thing. it's still pretty far out at sea, but each day -- and tonight we saw it again with the two things you were reporting from politico and the financial times. this hurricane, this political hurricane, it's still far out at sea and it's building in intensity. you say it's a category one. it's gone to category two. it's approaching category four. that's what's on donald trump's mind.
he can be talking tax reform in a broad general way, but i do think it's beginning to soak in on the public at large, including many people who supported donald trump that what he's basically talking about, what president trump is talking about, is a tax cut for people who make more than $250,000 a year, a substantial tax cut for them. for everybody else, not so much. that's going to be a very tough sell. it may even be dead on arrival. >> well, and to the question of whether it is dead on arrival, a big part of that is, to go back to what you said before about moral asituation, that's also what you have on capitol hill. a lot of presidents are very persuasive people. i've been in the room with barack obama on issues where i disagreed and thought he was wrong and he gets in front of you and makes his case and you come away like, he's pretty
persuasive. the question is can this president do that. >> that is the question. you put your finger on something. ronald reagan, bill clinton, they could talk a dog off a meat wagon if they get one-on-one in a room with you. ronald reagan did a lot of business with the democratic congress. tip o'neal. bill clinton on welfare reform. time after time real leaders in the presidency find a way to either persuade or put the fear in you. lyndon johnson was excellent of working you both ways, complimenting you, persuading you, you have to do this, senator, for me. and then saying, by the way, if
you don't, there will be hell to pay. donald trump has tried that any number of times but it rings hollow with him. i will say that the predicting road is littered with carcasses of people who underestimated donald trump. what he's trying to do now, trying to do today in missouri, he's trying to frame the narrative for the fall pour post labor day. given what's happened in houston, southeast texas and louisiana and mississippi, he's going to have a very difficult time to do that. >> that is a great point because one of the things that was so stark today, that split screen, the president is talking about tax reform and here's what's happening and they're going to have a huge legislative list to get relief to those folks as soon as they get back there. >> this is the very important point. congress comes back and the
number one thing in congress is not going to be tax reform. they'll see it as important. the number one thing is going to be $100 billion. >> pass this thing and they certainly can't say we'll get to that. >> what is it going to look like for a congressman who has to run in his district next year or a senator who has to run two years past that to say on the one hand we have to come up with $100 billion for help in houston and by the way, we want to give a tax cut to anybody who makes more than $250,000 a year. really tough sell. >> as always, thanks for your insight. let's go to lawrence wilkerson. the president says talking is not the solution which says that military force is with a nuclear power, and mattis says what i think is correct and i think most people would view as correct, no, that's not true. that is a remarkable rebuke to the commander-in-chief. >> it is. let me say first, chris, that i want to identify with dan's comments about houston, the sad situation there, and yet the heroic situation there. i went to high school and junior high in houston and i remember dan's reporting and i remember that hurricane that he referred to. so my heart goes out to hughes tone yans and the texans. you've just put your finger on what is happening across the cabinet most dramatically with tillerson and mattis and that is that they're not going to follow the guidance that comes from this president which is not in accordance with good ethics, good morality or legal. or in some cases and maybe even this is more important, stupid.
so, we're going to see -- we're either seeing a strategy of mutt and jeff which i very much doubt, or we're seeing develop some real opposition from some of the principle members of his cabinet, and that's going to make this president even more ineffective. let me say something else, too. the most important element of presidential power is the bully pulpit, and what donald trump has done is murder that power. he has no capacity whatsoever to use the bully pulpit. we've seen that repeatedly, and he has eliminated at least 50% or more of his presidential power by being so inept at using that bully pulpit. >> do you find as someone who served in an administration, i think in several actually, do you find it unnerving this idea that the president says things and then the head of the pentagon or the head of the state essentially ignores them.
>> it is unnerving. it's unnerving particularly with regard to foreign policy because it means our friends, allies and even our enemies in the world are just utterly puzzled at what's going on in the united states. but in the sense of my citizenship in this republic, i'm encouraged by the fact that we do have some talent and some brains and some strategic thinking and key cabinet posts, and they're not going to sit down and take this president's bali hoo and tweeting and orders and they're going to do what's best for the country. we might wind up having a constitutional crises because of that but i'll buy that before i buy everybody just totying up to a president who doesn't know what he's doing and carrying out his orders irrespective of the rekt tud of those orders. >> what do you mean by a constitutional crises? >> you might have key members of the cabinet going over to the congress and saying things under the table and manufacturing a
crises that presents the president and the congress in opposition to one another. unless we have sufficient reason to develop articles of impeachment in the house of representatives, the only real avenue the constitution gives us, that can get dangerous. >> always a great pleasure to have you on, thank you very much. >> thanks for having me, chris. ahead, disappointed and let down, what some reluctant trump voters are saying about the president seven months in. stay with us.
third time as people retreat to bleachers to try to stay dry. in nearby beaumont, texas which saw five inches of rain today on top of 26 inches yesterday, helicopters are rescuing entire families. a chemical plant in crossby, texas could catch fire or explode in the next few days, the ceo saying the company has, quote, no way to prevent this. texas governor greg abbott said the tab will likely surpass hurricane katrina in 2005. >> the katrina funding was well over $100 billion. i want to say it was well over $125 billion. so if we go on a parallel standard, it should be far in excess of that amount. >> while president donald trump is promising to help texas rebuild, the ep reports federal flood insurance program covers
even more homes in the area than it did five years ago. the ap also reports that house republicans are looking to slash nearly $1 billion from fema's general disaster relief account in order to finance the wall with mexico. politico's michael crum literally wrote the book on it and joins me now. let's start on the first thing, the president's budget i believe called for these cuts to fema and the disaster fund. the idea now is that it was going to pay for the wall. can they really come back to congress and do that? >> probably not. i mean, not to defend them too hard, it's a question of values. but their budget cut just about everything except for defense and border security. so, you know, if there was another ebola crises people would be talking about their cuts to public health. if that chemical plant you mentioned explodes, people will talk about their cuts to the epa or the labor department. right now it's only natural that they're talking about cuts to
fema and the coast guard because they really did try to cut just about everything. >> one of the things that i think has played a role here and that is going to be a huge fight that people maybe don't quite see coming is the national flood insurance program, and that might sound obscure and wonky, but it is really important and in some ways has already in a quite literal way paved the way for what we saw in houston. you wrote a great piece about this. how has that program brought us to the point where we are seeing the worst floods ever, seven of the eight i think worst floods ever just in the last 20 years? >> look, storms are natural events, but floods are almost always man made disasters. when the waters rise it doesn't matter if there aren't people and stuff in the way. what the flood insurance program has done is essentially made it really cheap to build in harm's way. there are supposed to be standards to prevent new construction in the 100-year flood zone to require you to elevate or relocate if you get
really substantial from a flood. but back in 1998 they released a report called higher ground where they talked about repetitive flood losses and there was one home that had flooded 16 times in 18 years under the program. of course, that home was in houston which was the national capital of repetitive losses. we've seen it again with a tropical storm in 2001 that caused $5 billion of damage in houston. again in 2015, 2016 and now 2017. they call them flood plains because it's plain that they flood. if you make it cheap to build there, people are going to build. >> what we are doing right now with national policy is have the federal government subsidize and incentivize people to build in areas that are likely to flood. it then is a terrible pain and i've interviewed people after sandy and other places to try to get the reimbursement. but we're basically
incentivizing people to build in floods and now they're going to go back to congress and try to reform this program. only 15% of people have flood insurance and they're saying, i'm screwed. >> they're supposed to have this 100-year flood maps where anybody that lives in a place that's likely to get flooded once every 100 years or has a 1% chance of getting flooded in any particular year is supposed to have flood insurance in order to get a mortgage. but houston has had three 500-year floods in the last three years which of course would be a 1 in 2 million chance if there was a coincidence, but it's not a coincidence. you build in the flood plain, you're paving over wet lands and prairies that used to soak up the water and instead you're creating highways and driveways that toss more water into the bayous. you're increasing the floods and you have more people and businesses in harm's way, you're increasing the cost and that's
how you've had pretty much all of the really costly floods in u.s. history have been in the last couple of decades. >> i want to highlight one thing you just said. three 500-year floods in houston in the last three years. thanks for your time. >> any time, chris. the president's most fervent supporters cheer him on. plus, a very special thing one thing two next.
thing one tonight, ready for the big leagues? as viewers of this program know, i am a diehard cubs fan. i got to throw the first pitch at wrigley field which we've shown just a few times. the other night i got to thinking something i think about a lot frankly. if i took a season's worth of plate appearances in the major leagues would i get a single hit? i think the answer is no. a few minutes later i got an encouraging response from retired major league pitcher dan herron who finished his career with the cubs and he responded, yes, you would. hey, coming from a big league starting pitchpitcher, i'll take literally the most insane nerdy
i know-- i got a loan 20 years ago, and i got robbed. that's why i started lendingtree-- the only place you can compare up to 5 real offers side by side, for free. it's like shopping for hotels online, but our average customer can save twenty thousand dollars. at lendingtree, you know you're getting the best deal. so take the power back and come to lendingtree.com, because at lendingtree when banks compete, you win. last week i tweeted a question i often think about, if i took a season's worth of plate appearances in the majors would i get a single hit. today a response. actually, a meticulously researched response from the uber nerdy website fan graph which averaged bat swing and speed and even crunching the minor league numbers of potentially comparable players, guys who don't belong on a pro ball field as hayes did.
what did they find for someone like me seeing roughly 600 at bats over one season. with a 97% strikeout rate and 100 batting average on balls and play, worse than baseball's ever seen, hayes would get 1.8 hits. almost two hits. the co-founder with the firm they consulted with said it's likely to expect a few more and it doesn't hurt that as a lefty he's closer to first base. by now you've probably
by now you've probably become familiar with a certain genre of news story, the one that says despite everything trump supporters still support donald trump and basically always will no matter what. to a large extent that's true. there are huge numbers of hard core trump backers, the kinds of people who show up at his political rallies to keep cheering him on. there's no amount of russia scandal or anything else that's going to cause them to stop supporting the president. but the hardest of the hard core supporters are not the reason donald trump is president of the
united states. remember, trump got less than 45% of the vote in the gop primaries. he was not the first choice of a majority of republicans. but in november, the so-called reluctant trump voter was born, basically republicans who didn't really want to vote for trump but voted for trump and there are signs that some of them had enough. trump's approval ratings has been trending downwards all all listen to what a group of voters in pittsburgh had to say. five of these people voted for trump. >> outrageous. >> dishonest. >> disappointed. >> narcissistic. >> abject disappointment. >> unique. >> not ready to be president. >> off the scale. >> crazy. >> completely unfit to be president. >> unbelievable. >> contemptible. >> everyone in the focus group was disappointed and impatient with the president. >> what most disappoints me is he's such an incredibly flawed
individual, that has articulated many of the values that i hold dear, and the messenger is overwhelming the message. >> he's a nut. everybody knew he was a nut. but there comes a point in time that you need to become professional. he's not even professional, let alone presidential. >> did you vote for him? >> unfortunately, yes. >> the thing that drives me crazy is all the tweeting he does. why doesn't he just quit that, tweeting. >> this guy, he's not a politician. but in some aspects he's almost turning into a politician. just in a different way.
he's saying what he thinks his base wants to hear, whatever. but he's just -- he's let me down. >> despite the disappointment, none of them would have actually withdrawn -- have actually withdrawn their support for the president. >> he's trending really the wrong way for quite a long period of time. but possibly he could have an epiphany and change. i hope he does. >> i wouldn't change my vote, but i hope he makes changes in himself to right the ship. >> i know what you're thinking, why did so many of those trump voters say they voted for him in the first place. that's next. ♪
when you don't get enough sleep, and your body aches, you're not yourself. tylenol® pm relieves pain and helps you fall fast asleep and stay asleep. we give you a better night, you're a better you all day. and for your daytime pain relief, try tylenol® extra strength. year with the new sleep number 360 smart bed. it senses and automatically adjusts on both sides. the new 360 smart bed is part of our biggest sale of the year where all beds are on sale. and right now save 50% on the labor day limited edition bed, plus 36 month financing. ends monday!
>> to be honest, it was anti-hillary vote. >> i liked his platform, keeping jobs in the united states. >> my vote was more, i didn't want more of what we already had. >> pollsters conducting the group with the pittsburgh area voters. peter hart joins me now. peter, really fascinating. i thought an interesting look at a really crucial category of voters, who are not the hard-core supporters that we don't often see. what surprised you most? >> what surprised me most is how embarrassed the american public is with donald trump as their president. i really did not expect that from his group of voters. as you say, those are the soft supporters. but they represent about 15% of all voters. and that's a group that he has to have behind him. and what's so important here is, i've been doing this since richard nixon was president. and a focus group every single president, no president has ever embarrassed the american public.
what's happened is they've disagreed with them on issues, disagreed with them on moral stance, and everything else, but this person, donald trump, embarrasses them. >> embarrasses them in the sense that the supporters i saw saying like the woman said, he's a nut, we all knew he was a net, or one thing that they just feel like it's all about him. which i think a lot of people feel that way. i was interested to see that trump voters were getting that sense, too. >> without a doubt. they kept saying, and coming back to the plan that it is about him. and he's -- he only thinks about himself. as one person put it, he doesn't have the ability to relate to or care about other people. it always comes back to dividing people rather than finding a way to unite them. >> and yet, and yet, they have not abandoned their support. they do not revert their vote.
i saw some polling today 76% of the voters don't want their vote back. they seem frustrated. his personality really irks them. but that's not the same as, i'm not going to vote for him again. >> i think it's a long road for him. what it comes down to is, he has to change who he is. it is not a problem of a particular position whether it be health care or something else. this is about the core of the human being, and more importantly, it's the embarrassment factor. if you go anyplace around the world, there is a sense that people say, what are you doing in america? and that's what's being fed back to people. and that's how they're feeling day to day. >> i want to play you this clip, which you ask folks about the mueller investigation. i thought this was so fascinating. i'll play the clip and you can respond. take a listen. >> i'll go around very quickly. i'll start with marion and go the other way around.
robert mueller. if you don't know, just say don't know. robert mueller. >> watchdog. >> serious. >> hurry up. >> domino. >> -- don't know. >> don't know. >> don't know. >> hopefully effective. >> don't know. >> don't know. >> i don't know. >> it's fascinating. i think clinton voters who are saying, like hurry up, they know mueller, they're supportive of him. you saw them saying contemptible in the very strong feelings about trump. but the four don't knows, those were all trump voters, right? >> yes. and essentially, we always think that everybody's listening to every single show and they know every single person. and the fact is, that robert mueller is just being introduced to an awful lot of people. and so he is not somebody that has established his credentials for a lot of people, but certainly with the media, he has done so. >> that's interesting. it's a reminder of where people are getting news from, what they are getting. how closely they're following things. peter hart, thanks for joining us. learned a lot.
>> thank you. that is "all in" for this evening. good evening, rachel. breaking tonight. donald trump can't escape the russia headlines. new roaring on robert mueller's investigation, paul manafort, trump attorney michael cohen and the trump junior meeting. plus, what putin spokesman has to say about that e-mail on trump tower moscow. also, the president hits the road to sell a tax plan. the only problem, there's not much of a plan to sell. instead, he's warning congress not to disappoint him. and the number out tonight of american who's believe president trump is tearing the country apart. "the 11th hour" begins now.