tv All In With Chris Hayes MSNBC September 14, 2019 5:00pm-6:00pm PDT
cause. people don't want a handout, they want a fair shake. >> you figured me out as working class. thank you. that's "hardball." "all in with chris hayes" starts right now. >> hell, yes, we're going to take your ar-15, your ak-47. >> beto o'rourke on his promise to take away assault weapons. and the death threat he got afterwards. he joins us live tonight. then -- >> i own a lot of different places. soon you'll find that out. >> the court victory that could nail trump on the emoluments clause. details emerge just how often the air force stayed on trump's scottish resort. protests in the streets of baltimore as the president comes to town. z >> the light's no good. i always look orange. >> reporter: "all in" starts
now. >> good evening from washington, d.c. i'm joy reid in for chris hayes. tonight we're learning more about who won last night's democratic debate. last night found that elizabeth warren was the clearest overall winner and the only candidate among the top four who emerged with more democrats voting for her. the polling also found good news for pete buttigieg, cory booker, andrew yang and beto o'rourke, the only one with a shooting in his home state of texas seemed to shift the concern of the gun safety debate in america. >> in odessa, i met the mother of a 15-year-old girl who was shot by an ar-15. that mother watched her bleed to death in the course of an hour because so many other people were shot by that ar-15 in
odessa there weren't enough ambulances to get to them on time. hell, yes, we're going to take away your ar-15, your ak-47. we're not going to let them be used on an american again. >> this comes at the end of a week after donald trump promised to address something about gun violence and once again did absolutely nothing. trump has reportedly assured the nra that he won't even support universal background checks despite overwhelming support for them over the public. in the wake of last night's debate, many republicans and even some democrats are casting his call to ban assault weapons as a fringe omission. over half of americans want them to have an assault weapon buyback program.
briscoe cane is patrolling after showing what appeared to be a gun. he tweeted, my ar is ready for you, robert francis. >> he replied, this is a death threat. clearly you shouldn't own an ar-15 and neither should anybody else. the campaign referred the threat to the fbi. joining me now is beto o'rourke, democratic candidate for president. congressman, thank you so much for being here. >> thank you for having me, joy. grateful. >> thank you. let's start with that threat. can you give us an update on what was the response from the npr? have you gotten a response back after that threat was given to you? >> if we have i haven't heard yet. i think this is a routine matter. if we're ever threatened by anyone, we turn that over to law
enforcement as i think the campaign did yesterday evening. but i think briscoe cane makes our case for us, that no one should have a weapon designed for war that's used to kill people as effectively, as efficiently, as great a number as possible because it can be used, as he tried to do last night, as a tool of intimidation, to try to change our politics based on violence or threatened violence. so with more than 10 million of these ar-15s and ak-47s out there, after the shooting at walmart, 22 dead, 7 dead in odessa and midland, many other communities in this country, it's time to not only stop selling ar-15s and ak-47s, it's to bring them back home, out of our streets, out of our communities, out of our lives. that makes us safer. >> you're a texan. can you explain to those who do not understand this cultural phenomenon of essentially saying, i'm going to protect my second amendment rights and
express that by threatening people and saying, come and get my guns, making implied threats of using the guns to hurt people or kill people as a tactic. >> i would not want to leave your viewers with the impression that is a sentiment widely shared in texas. in fact, i've spent a lot of time in representative cain's district. and what he said last night, using firearms to intimidate people. gun owners alike, republicans, democrats, no matter where you live in these 254 counties, we urge responsible gun ownership which not threaten anybody with a firearm. using guns to hunt or for self-defense makes a lot of sense to us here in texas, but having a weapon of war, and even those texans who own ar-15s,
they've told me themselves, i don't need this. i don't need it to hunt or protect myself. it's fun to use. but if giving this back or cutting it to pieces or selling it to the government keeps things safer, let's do it because i have kids in school as well, and they ask me if it's a matter of when or if a killer is going to come into their school and take the lives of their fellow students or take their kids' lives. so, look, we're either going to let the nra set the terms of this debate. we're either going to allow briscoe cane to set the terms of this debate or we'll let the american people, including march for our lives which is coming out with a proposal to make peace in this country and do something about the 40,000 gun deaths we see every single year. that's who we should be listening to right now, that's who i am listening to as well as people across this country who want us to actually see us do something about gun violence.
>> i'm in a worm hole interviewing you today about previous successful efforts in this country to ban firearms. you know that you cannot have a tommy gun anymore, or a machine gun anymore, because that was successfully outlawed through something called the national firearms act that actually used a tax on those weapons that didn't even touch the second amendment issue, so the idea of taxing them, then if you have one you didn't pay taxes for, that's the way to do it. how mechanically, how actually would you implement the policy that you would want to see happen? >> i'm proposing a mandatory buyback. so everyone who owns a weapon of war would sell that back to the government, and we would establish a fair market price to compensate those gun owners for the guns that they would be selling to the government that would no longer be in their homes, would no longer end up in our streets. so that is the preferred course. but i also fully intend upon listening to everyone, gun
owners and non-gun owners alike, on this issue. if there is a better way to get them off the strieets or to ensure they're never used against us, i'm all ears. but after listening to people, including owners of ar-15s, this makes the most sense to me. now, it will obviously require us to work with congress and the constituencies of those members of congress who i have been going out and talking to and listening to and who are there. you mentioned public polling is already beginning to repleflect seismic shift on this issue in america. it just needs to be reflected in our representation in congress, it needs to be reflected on the person in the white house. i know we can lead that effort. i know that america is ready. and i know that we have so much leadership out there with moms in demand, march for our lives and others who are ready to move on this issue after decades of inaction. >> the briscoe canes in the world are a minority in the
world, but they are there. there are people who will openly say, whether on social media or not, come and get them, that attitude. if you had, for instance, a mandatory buyback policy, how would law enforcement be protected from people who are essentially admitting that the way that they would protect their ability to own these weapons is to use them? >> you know, my faith, my confidence is in the people of this country. and going to a gun show in kochb w -- conway, arkansas and listening to the owners of ar-15s and the vendors of ar-15s, many of whom, as you can imagine, didn't agree with my proposal but who are willing to have the conversation. some said, look, i have an ar-15. don't need it, would gladly sell it back or destroy them. a lot of them said they would follow the law. we're a nation of laws. it's part of what distinguishes us from the rest of the world. i believe america will comply with the law and i believe there will be a due process in
devising the law in the first place where we listen to stakeholders all concerned and affected but do not allow the delays we've seen that have lasted for decades that stop us from finally acting on this. i don't want to give in to the hype or some of the scare tactics that have been employed to stop us from even considering this in the first place, much like we don't go door to door to enforce almost any law in the united states. in fact, i don't think we do that for any law in the united states. this would not be something we do, and i only raise that, joy, because others have said this is something that we would fear if there were a mandatory buyback program. we expect people to follow the law, and that's certainly what i believe would happen. >> speaking of fear, i want to talk about some of the members of your own party that are uncomfortable with the fact that you really have changed the conversation on gun reform in a very blunt way. i want to play you senator chris coons, who was on earlier on cnn today talking about your
proposal. take a listen. s . >> are you supportive of a mandatory buyback program of all of those assault weapons on america's streets right now? >> i am not. i frankly think that clip will be played for years at second amendment rallies with organizations that try to scare people by saying democrats are coming for your guns. >> you worried about that? >> no. and chris shouldn't be worried about it, either. first of all, i wish him all the luck in the world of being able to pass mandatory universal background checks in the united states senate. and i know they've been working on it ever since at least 2013 after sandy hook, to no avail thus far. but if he begins by allowing the nra to set the terms of the debate, then we may have lost this before we've even begun. let's instead of being worried about the nra or the response to
this very sound policy proposal, let's instead be worried about the fact that you have kids being shot by ar-15s and ak-47s in this country, kids who are afraid of going to school after this weekend on monday, not knowing if they themselves will face a gunman. people in my hometown of el paso, texas fearing going into a walmart because they fear that they have a target on their back right now because someone was able to legally purchase an ak-47 and drive that weapon 600 miles and open fire on people innocently shopping before the first day of school in el paso, texas, before then one of the safest cities in the united states of america. that's what we should be afraid of and responding to right now, and those people, the survivors, the family members who have lost someone very dear to them, those are the ones who compel me. it's their judgment that i fear, not the nra, not the polling, not the politics of this.
senator coons' job is to define the goals and help bring this country around, and that's what i'm trying to do as a candidate and that's what i will do as president. >> beto o'rourke, thank you very much. really appreciate you being here tonight. >> thank you, joy. >> thank you very much. we're joined now by tiffany kroft, co-founder of the bbc as well as michael singleton. so, friend, beto o'rork is doing something very interesting. he's taking the fear off the table for democrats. >> right. how does that change the way democrats communicate on the gun issue, because it hasn't changed much for some of these senators. >> i think he's pushing the lever. it needs to be pushed. he's not running scared. you just heard from senator chris coons say, that's going to be played at pro gun rallies. who is running to get those votes? they're not going to vote for democrats, anyway, so why are you shaping your lejgislation ad political courage on what they might find offensive. beto said he doesn't care if
it's popular or not. when he was speaking to the majority of the country, he was saying, this is what we want. when you play that clip next to beto o'rourke and you hear chris coons say he's worried about what people will say at gun rallies, it doesn't look good for the party. beto looks like he has courage, chris coons does not. >> the question of fear is relevant in politics because politicians respond to what they are afraid of, including the nra, even though they haven't been heard that much in elections. what would it take for the republicans to be more afraid of the actions of the world, of the parkland kids of the world and of the public for them to change? is it that corporate america really does seem to be moving against them? is it gutsy politicians like that? what would it take? >> joy, i think you have to reach voters. when you look at the senate, for example, when there are over 20 republicans up for reelection next year, it would only take
five of those individuals for democrats to take back control of the senate. i think mitch mcconnell is a person who looks at advantage, strategically speaking, as far as electro politics is concerned. if you look at what occurred in 2018 where you saw some of those white suburban moms saying, we can't stick with republicans, we're going democratic, i do think you could see some republican senators in trouble saying, look, we have to do something on this, otherwise i risk not winning my reelection bid. >> and i definitely think what you could call sort of safety moms, the moms taking their kids to school and having to do the drills, they're actually an important constituency across racist groups on this independent and democratic side. democrats do have these weird false memories of the '90s. they ever this false memory that impeachment meant that bill clinton was reelected. he was already reelected at the time he was impeached. he did get more popular but that
wouldn't work for trump. in his mind they're stuck in that era. with guns there is this false memory that passing an assault weapons ban, there was an actual assault weapons ban that passed, and their false memory is that it doomed the party. how can democrats undo that false path of belief? >> i wonder if it is a false memory for democrats or if it is a new republican party. as the party moved even further right, have they become more sycophants in this era we're living in now. are they gun freaks who talk about their guns like they're their children? i think some democratic senators like we just saw are afraid of ticking off those people even though those people are never going to vote for you, anyway. and when you talk about the moms who we hope will come out in big numbers, but let's not forget about the 53% of white women who still voted for this president, the 49% who remained loyal
during the midterms. that is a huge voting block. and there are some democrats who are stuck on getting that group to change their mind. news flash, they're not changing their mind. we saw that in 2016, we saw it in 2018. if you play spades, we say play to win. democrats have to play to win. >> right, and republicans are going to stick obviously with the nra, come what may. >> trump doesn't have a choice, joy. his chance to increase the number of constituents he can target and mobilize to vote for him are very, very slim. >> the thing that seems counter intuitive to me, the people who say come and take them, who make threatening tweets like this briscoe character, that is actually something you and i have all heard before, right? this attitude of saying, i'm going to say i'm going to protect my second amendment rights by threatening law enforcement, by threatening anyone who comes near me, using
the very threat. that's the reason people don't think you should have an ar-15 or ak-47, whatever it is, but it's a very friendly part of the base. >> it's a fringe part fortunate ba -- of the base. my father was lost to gun violence, my father lost his middle brother to gun violence. someone murdered someone a day or two after the second brother was killed in gun violence. this is something very personal. this isn't something i read in a book. and what concerns me about this, guys, is i wonder, let's say we remove the assault weapons, right? i think this is really an issue with white, young men. these things have been around since, i want to say, 1959, the ar style platform. and it's only been the past 20-plus yiears that we've seen the continuance of these massive type massacres.
african-american youth aren't shooting up malls of people, hispanics aren't shooting up malls of people, so i think if we do this, which we have the right to say we should, i don't think this is going to stop these young white men, joy, from maybe grabbing their father's pistol to continue this style of hate with another weapon. i really think white americans -- this isn't on us, i would argue -- really need to do something and speak directly to the issues that are impacting their youth, as they would say if it was on our shoes. oh, those black people, they need to do something about -- >> except that when the mob was using tommy guns to mow people down, there were public massacres on a regular basis, the response of the federal government, including fdr, was to ban those oozies and tommy guns. you cannot have them, they are illegal. it's been done before, and you know what? the mob wasn't able to do that. >> most republican voters, but not the friends. beto is right about that. they said, hey, let's figure this out, guys. >> we can't discount the power
of the republican party over the nra. >> tiffany cross, michael singleton, great discussion. thank you both for being here tonight. up next a big loss for donald trump today and an appeals court reinstated an emoluments clause against him. we'll talk about what happened next with one original lawyers involved in that suit, right after this. involved in that suit, right after this so you only pay for what you need. wow. thanks, zoltar. how can i ever repay you? maybe you could free zoltar? thanks, lady. taxi! only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ wayfair's got your perfect mattress. whether you're looking for a top-brand at a great price. ready to upgrade. moving in. moving on up. or making big moves. deliveries ship free and come with a 100-night free trial.
no matter your budget. or your sleep style. we have quality options for everyone. so search and shop. save and snooze. and rest easy, knowing that we've got your back. literally. that's what you get, when you've got wayfair. so shop now. (tennis ball hit) (tennis ball hit) (tennis ball hit) (tennis ball hit) (tennis ball hit) (crowd cheering) (tennis ball hit) (tennis ball hit) (tennis ball hit)
the alarm bells were ringing literally from day one of donald trump's presidency. as a president-elect, he announced he would not divest from his family businesses like his hotel, which to many meant it was obvious that leaders of foreign governments would, for example, stay at the trump hotel in washington, d.c. located in an old post office property that the trump organization leases, get this, from the federal government as a way of currying favor with the commander in chief. he was a potential walking violation of the emoluments
clause of the united states constitution which prohibits a foreign government from enriching the president of the united states. so on the first full week of his presidency, the very first emoluments lawsuit was filed against donald trump, a lawsuit that ultimately included plaintiffs, such as a new york owner who said clients would prefer trump properties rather than their own because he's president of the united states. they said plaintiffs were not legally entitled to sue. today the upper court reversed the lower court and the case can go forward. to explain the significance of what just happened, i'm joined by an associate law professor at fordham university who was one of the lawyers involved in this particular case when it was originally filed against trump.
zephyr, great to see you. talk about what this means. did the original case mean that the litigants didn't have standing and did this court say, yes, you do. >> absolutely. this is a huge deal. this is the first time a federal court of appeals has recognized plaintiffs who can go forward with the emoluments lawsuit against donald trump. it will go back to district court, and there are two other similar lawsuits in -- any time a federal court has looked at whether or not donald trump is violating -- or looked at what the meaning of emoluments is, they say it includes profits and gain that the president is getting from these emoluments. and there has been the standing question of whether or not parties are in a position to bring a suit, and today in a
really well-reasoned, deep, thoughtful opinion said, no, the district court got it wrong. the hotel owner and people involved in the hospitality industry, people who work in the restaurant business who have to compete against donald trump for the business of foreign governments, and also state and federal governments, there's actually two emoluments clauses, and i can talk about that, do have standing to bring the suit. so the case will go forward. this is a huge day for the rule of law in america. i mean, this has been an ongoing constitutional violation that really goes to the heart of the anti-corruption clauses at the constitution. >> and one thinks of the scottish resorts where essentially donald trump's resort is competing with the marriotts and hiltons that are actually closer to the airport, but people are bypassing them and going 40 miles away to stay at his resorts. is that the kind of thing you're talking about? because when the original court was dismissed in 2014, when the
district court dismissed the original case, the "new york times" thought that ruling was believed to be the first time in 230 years interpreting what they meant by the emoluments clause. but what i just described, that you just bypass these hiltons, et cetera, and go all the way 40 miles away and stay in a trump hotel because somehow that seems to confirm benefit? >> that's absolutely right. you have people working in the hospitality industry who, as experts, brought testimony to the district court, and we'll see more of that as the case goes forward, said these are people who are directly competing with donald trump, and yet you have foreign governments who are looking to curry favor with the president. i mean, donald trump has so much power over trade and military policy that, of course, you will see foreign governments looking to this angle and influence in american policy. and they have to compete against
trump's hotels and restaurants. so what this second circuit held is that as alleged, the plaintiffs can have alleged a real injury that is personal to them, not general to the public, and that the relief of forcing the -- basically forcing donald trump to stop accepting foreign money would put those plaintiffs in a better position. it's a really exciting day for the constitution. what we have not yet had a chance to see is all the details about all the foreign money, state money and federal government money that is flowing to donald trump. but we finally will have a chance to move forward with this really horrific constitutional violation that we've gotten used to. >> it is going to be educationally, the constitution, with how much this era is.
i...decided to take the dna test. and i...was... shocked. right away, called my mom, called my sisters. i'm from cameroon, congo, and...the bantu people. i had ivory coast, and ghana...togo. i was grateful... i just felt more connected...to who i am. new features. greater details. richer stories. get your dna kit today at ancestry.com.
it's my special friend, antonio. his luxurious fur calms my nerves when i'm worried about moving into our new apartment. why don't we just ask geico for help with renters insurance? i didn't know geico helps with renters insurance. yeah, and we could save a bunch too. antonio! fetch computer! antonio? i'll get it. get to know geico and see how much you could save on renters insurance.
in the human brain, billions of nefor people with parkinson's, some neurons change their tune, causing uncontrollable tremors. now, abbott technology can target those exact neurons. restoring control and harmony, once thought to belost forever. the most personal technology is technology with the power to change your life. you really have to elect me. whether you like me or not, it makes no difference because the country will go to hell.
if any of these people get in, it will go to hell. i was joking but i'm really not joking. you have no choice because whoever they put in, the saner they are, the worse they're doing, and whoever they put in, it looks like a revolution to the left. they're going to take your money and very much hurt your families. i just don't think people could allow that to happen. >> that was the president of the united states last night sounding like a desperate man as the country slowly inches closer and closer to the 2020 election. donald trump seems to be resorting in that instance to desperate measures to fulfill a campaign promise he made in 2016. we knew from earlier this month trump planned to divert money from the pentagon to help pay for his wall on the southern border. we now know from a blockbuster report, his plan was to, quote,
take funds from other four dozen military construction projects with national security risks for the u.s. armed forces, according to a report by the air force. one of those cutbacks includes security units on a base in turkey that how'ses airmen. he said, if not funded, the main gate remains vulnerable to hostile penetration to the midst of contingency operations and an increased terrorist threat. courtney is here from the pentagon. courtney, thank you for being here. >> thank you for having me. >> so explain the construction projects being cut. >> there is actually 137 total projects across the military but the ones we're just reporting on today is the air force ones, 51 of them. the ones that really stuck out to me, these are all funds that have been unobligated. they were supposed to begin
sometime in near future because they had not begun. they were ripe picking because legally the pentagon was able to reobligate them, and of course president trump, under the national emergency, is sending the money out to the border. so the ones that really stuck out to me was the base main gate which you mention in the lead-in. of course, this has had an increase in national security concerns ever since the u.s. has been involved in the war in syria and the continued vovr involvement in the war in iraq. one i found particularly striking was a boiler that is, according to the air force, its failure is imminent. once this boiler goes, it's negative 65 degrees in alaska in the winter. within a matter of hours the entire base will need to be evacuated. that's a u.s. military base. in alaska, they will need to be evacuated. then there are a number of bases in europe as part of this u.n. defense initiative. this is something the u.s. put
together. it's supposed to deter russian aggression throughout europe with this military presence there. without this construction project, the money is being sent to the wall, and the u.s. military cannot base at many of these locations. >> was there any consultation -- i probably think i know the answer to this -- between the white house and the pentagon to talk through the necessity of some of these projects, and at least allow the pentagon to say, wait a minute, these are important to our national security, don't take the mone money away? >> the official i spoke to on the hill and people at the pentagon said each of the services was told, bring us a list of your unobligated projects, and the big pentagon dod and the white house took those lists and selected the ones they took the money away from. >> have you gotten any reporting on what the response is going to be? a lot of these are in some states and republicans have to
go home and answer to them. >> the way ford is very unclear. will these projects be funded in the near future? a big part of that will be the defense authorization act which is going into conference next week. there are some on the hill who are in favor of backfilling these projects, essentially replacing this money in a matter of a year. but then there are some saying, no, we're not going to backfill the money. at this point these projects, theoretically they're delayed. it's possible they could even be delayed for the foreseeable future because there's no money that's automatically being reobligated to them. >> that's a national security concern. courtney kube, thank you for your reporting. any good prosecutor can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich. that's the saying, so why is donald trump's justice department having such a hard time indicting andrew mccabe? the twist in that saga is next. t
(tennis ball hit) (tennis ball hit) (crowd cheering) (tennis ball hit) (tennis ball hit) (tennis ball hit) this fall, book two, separate qualifying stays at choicehotels.com... ...and earn a free night. because when your business is rewarding yourself, our business is you. book direct at choicehotels.com you should be mad at tech that makes things worse. but you're not, because you have e*trade whose tech makes life easier by automatically adding technical patterns on charts and helping you understand what they mean. don't get mad, get e*trade. why accept it frompt an incompyour allergy pills?e else. flonase sensimist. nothing stronger. nothing gentler. nothing lasts longer. flonase sensimist. 24 hour non-drowsy allergy relief
at verizon, we're building the most powerful 5g experience for america. that's why the nfl chose verizon. because they need the massive capacity of 5g with ultra wideband, so more screaming, streaming, posting fans... can experience 5g all at once. this is happening in 13 stadiums all across the country. now if verizon 5g can do this for the nfl... imagine what it can do for you.
in what amounts to a stunning politicalization of law enforcement, they keep investigating donald trump's ties to russia. but for now they may be coming up empty. just two weeks ago, the doj declined to press charges against former fbi director james comey after an internal investigation found no evidence he had leaked classified information to the press. now we're learning that the doj's investigation into comey's deputy director andrew mccabe may be falter iing, too. yesterday the doj offered prosecutors to seek indictment for mccabe for lying to investigators. but the "washington post" reported, quote, with a green light to proceed and a grand jury summoned back after a month-long hiatus to consider the case, the day came and went without public charges being filed.
mccabe remains in limbo. the doj asked in a letter they made public whether the grand jury considered charges against mr. mccabe. they said, we heard rumors from reporters starting this morning that the grand jury considering charges against mr. mccabe had declined to vote an indictment. we do not know the specific basis for the rumors but their credible enough that both the ny times and wark wash post published stoerd suggesting that the grand jury may have declined to vote in favor of indictment. we have an msnbc contributor and host of the great podcast "the oath" with chuck rosenberg. thank you for being here. tell me the notion of the origin
of this permission to indict, did that come from william barr? >> well, it would have come at least from the deputy attorney general who works directly for william barr, so i imagine that the leadership of the department of justice gave the u.s. attorney the green light to proceed. >> what makes me nervous about that is this notion that william barr would be willing to carry out what trump sees as the edict to go after his enemies, meaning anyone who is investigating his connections to russia. >> putting mr. barr aside for the moment, the problem with the president weighing in as vociferously as this one did suggested that no matter what happens, the process has been tainted. you don't have any presidents other than this one opining about who ought to be prosecuted by the justice department that he oversees. and so even if they have a valid case, even if prosecutors are acting in good faith, if they bring charges, there is the danger that it will be perceived as unfair.
>> and this grand jury, what do you make of this decision not to bring charges? does that indicate that the grand jury was unable to agree the charges should be filed? what do you make of it? >> when the grand jury returns an indictment, they call it a true bill. very creatively, when they don't return an indictment considered or rejected, they call the no true bill. those are incredibly rare. there are other possible explanations. maybe the grand jury showed up and didn't have a quorum to do business. >> you're saying it's rare for the grand jury not to indict. >> if a prosecutor asks a grand jury to indict and they do not, a no true bill, that's extraordinarily rare. other plausible explanations for why charges weren't filed publicly, maybe they didn't have a quorum, maybe they wanted to hear more information. it's a little bit hard to know. i do know this. when prosecutors present information to a grand jury and seek an indictment, they tend to get it. >> doesn't mr. mccabe have a right to know why there was no true bill and minor charges were
filed. >> that's a good question. minor jury matters by law and kept secret. if i did nothing wrong, i wouldn't want that made public even if i was cleared. so thardsere's a bit of the a dilemma here. if prosecutors asked for an indictment and the grand jury didn't return one, they found no probable cause, you would still have a grand jury matter that is by rule supposed to be kept secret. >> and would mr. mccabe have any recourse if, in his mind or the minds of his attorneys, even the attempt to indict him was purely political and was retribution. >> again, that's what makes this whole thing so dangerous, the president speaking the way he did of mr. mccabe, his family, his wife, really revolting behavior by the president. would he have recourse? probably not. but, joy, if there are not going to be charges filed against him in the end, in the long run, then he goes on and he leads his
own life and he doesn't worry about the president or what transpired before this. i hope that happens. i'm biased, andy is a friend of mine. he's a wonderful man. ef he was a good colleague. and i hope in the end no charges will be brought. >> we'll definitely keep an eye on it. chuck rosenberg, thank you for coming and explaining that to me. new reporting that the pentagon spent far more time and money at president trump's scottish resort than he let on. after this. he let on after this it sure is. (mom vo) over the years, we trusted it to carry and protect the things that were most important to us. we always knew we had a lot of life ahead of us. (mom) remember this? (mom vo) that's why we chose a car that we knew would be there for us through it all. (male vo) welcome to the all-new 2019 subaru forester. the longest-lasting, most trusted forester ever.
so you're with the ups store? yes. in fact, we printed these right here. oh, i thought you guys just did shipping. no we do printing, packing, faxing, notarizing, shredding, mailboxing, copying, taping, binding, uh huh... consulting, designing, returning, storing, and freighting. oh, and of course, shipping. so you're into shipping? we also do printing, packing, faxing... come in to the ups store today for every ing your small business needs. and of course, shipping. ever since you brought me home, that day.
i've been plotting to destroy you. sizing you up... calculating your every move. you think this is love? this is a billion years of tiger dna just ready to pounce. and if you have the wrong home insurance coverage, you could be coughing up the cash for this. so get allstate and be better protected from mayhem, like me-ow.
earlier today in baltimore, vice president mike pence seemed to extend an olive branch to congressman elijah cummings. house republicans gathered there for their annual retreat and said the president and the party are ready to work across the aisle, including congressman cummings, to improve the lives of boston residents. this comes after trump's visit to baltimore yesterday and trump
was met with a 14-foot-tall inflatable rat. boston residents made clear their anger of trump's comments back in july where he attacked congressman cummings and referred to as a disgusting rat rodent infested mess. while those protests continued outside donald trump rambled inside for 68 minutes. at one point listing names of people he had a meeting with recently. >> jeff grassley was there and joe and joan thune and mike pence. just a whole group of great people. >> mike pounce -- hmm. i don't think i've heard of him. mike pounce -- trump went on to treat the gathered republicans to have smokin' hot beauty tips. >> the light bulb, people said what's with the light bulb? i said here's the story. i looked at it. the bulb we're being forced to use number one to me most
importantly. the light's no good. i always look orange, and so do you. the light is the worst. a great guy got on in texas and wearing a big cowboy hat, a beautiful hat. wish we could wear them. nobody would ever look at my hair and criticize. ever notice in texas sit down and have breakfast. they wear the haft. i like that. i would do that. don't have to worry about hairspray or my hair blowing, beautifully blowing in the wind. >> so he doesn't want to worry about his hair blowing but maybe trump should be worried about his latest scandal as the air force launched an internal review how often its crews stayed at the new trump resort. new details on that right after this break. is break
is break ♪ ♪ award winning interface. ♪ ♪ award winning design. ♪ ♪ award winning engine. ♪ ♪ the volvo xc90. our most awarded luxury suv. ♪ ♪ the amount of student loan debt i have i'm embarrassed to even say i felt like i was going to spend my whole adult life paying this off thanks to sofi, i can see the light at the end of the tunnel as of 12pm today, i am debt free
♪ not owing anyone anything is the best feeling in the world, i cannot stop smiling about it ♪ now, there's skyrizi. i have moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. 3 out of 4 people achieved... ...90% clearer skin at 4 months... ...after just 2 doses. skyrizi may increase your risk of infections... ...and lower your ability to fight them. before treatment your doctor should check you for infections and tuberculosis. tell your doctor if you have an infection... ...or symptoms such as fevers,... ...sweats, chills, muscle aches or coughs... ...or if you plan to or recently received a vaccine. i feel free to bare my skin. visit skyrizi.com. and now for their service to the community, we present limu emu & doug with this key to the city. [ applause ] it's an honor to tell you that liberty mutual customizes your car insurance so you only pay for what you need.
and now we need to get back to work. [ applause and band playing ] only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ so chantix can help you quit slow turkey.rkey. along with support, chantix is proven to help you quit. with chantix you can keep smoking at first and ease into quitting so when the day arrives, you'll be more ready to kiss cigarettes goodbye. when you try to quit smoking, with or without chantix, you may have nicotine withdrawal symptoms. stop chantix and get help right away if you have changes in behavior or thinking, aggression, hostility, depressed mood, suicidal thoughts or actions, seizures, new or worse heart or blood vessel problems, sleepwalking,
or life-threatening allergic and skin reactions. decrease alcohol use. use caution driving or operating machinery. tell your doctor if you've had mental health problems. the most common side effect is nausea. talk to your doctor about chantix. week ago we learned that an air national guard crew stayed at donald trump's turnberry resort in scotland this spring en route from the u.s. to kuwait. that seemed odd. then we found out that air force crews have stayed at donald trump's resort in scotland at least four times since september of last year. hmm. sounds like a lot. turns out the real number might be much higher. political reports said "the air force says it sent crews to trump's scottish resort up to 40 times" break the stories from politico, how many times are we talking about? >> we still don't know exactly how many times the air force had
stayed and lodged crews at trump's turn bberry resort sinc he actually took office in 2016. we're hoping that answer that question but getting a readout from the air force has turned out to be extremely difficult. i want to note the air force has been giving us this talking point of since 2015 we've had crews lodging here and, of course, 2015 was under the obama administration. to take off the heat they wanted to seem it was more normal than reported, but turnberry was closed half of 2015 and half of 2016 and the amount of flights landing in the airport increased dramatically every year since 2015 about 40 overnight stays in that year increasing to about 220 between 2018 and 2019. with overnight stays choosing turnberry more often. we're hoping to hear soon from
the air force what they've uncovered about the last two and a half years of trump's presidency. >> the military and air force been able to cross-tabulate and match up a notion they stayeds there because the other hotels were full? turnberry is quite a bit farther than the hotels close to the airport? >> we don't know that yet because the air force is still conducting this internal view and very tight-lipped what they reve reveal. we got this statistic late yesterday about the 60% of all lodgings taken place in the last four years and we're hoping to figure out, a., whether all the rooms the air force booked were filled at the time when they booked trump turnberry and why it's a popular alternative and no to mention the emoluments clause the oversight committee is investigating and, of course, who's doing the booking?
how high is this going? we've gotten mixed reactions to that as well? some crew members tell us they book it themselves. ship tell us it's coming from higher up and they wouldn't be able to do it without air mobility command and some say the airport it doing it for them. one instance, turnberry was catering food even though the crew didn't end up staying there still sent a van full of food to the aircraft. still deep in the weeds on the story and hoping to learn more. >> on the corporate side if we book a corporate travel there is a prohibition on booking something extravagantly expensive without permission. isn't turnberry more expensive than a hilton or marriott hotel closer to the airport? >> yes. 90% of the time, 90% of the year trump turnberry is prohibitively expensive tore the air force to stay at. outside the per diem rates.
10% of the year those rates fall within the per diem rate military can spend at a hotel. lodging at trump turnberry 6% and it's only available 10% of the time, trump turnberry is basically getting the military's accommodations 0 perce60% when available and when they need the stays at the lowest. the figure about the % is misleading wah trump turnberry is not available 100% of the time. >> right. have you found a directive? anything that says that somebody in the white house, some somebody in donald trump's world or business is encouraging members of the military to stay at turnberry? >> we have not found that and it's not something we've reported. we've never reported trump himself directed this just wanted to know when we found out the story and air crews saying this is unusual this was out of
the norm. that the air force, it had never been reported before that the air force was, in fact, staying at this resort. >> stay on it. you are a great reporter. thank you so much for being on tonight. appreciate it. that is it for "all in" this evening. catch me on my show. "the rachel maddow show" starts right now. good evening. >> good evening, joy. thank you, my friend. much appreciated. looking forward to seeing your show tomorrow. >> thank you. appreciate it. and this hour, first to tell you right off the bat that massachusetts senate and democratic presidential candidate elizabeth warren is going to be here not tonight. also not monday. but on tuesday of next week. we have just locked in an interview date for nasenator elizabeth warren live in studio with me tuesday night. far as we can tell the reason she'll be in new york early next week and therefore available to come to the studio, she's