tv All In With Chris Hayes MSNBC October 15, 2019 12:00am-1:00am PDT
that's our broadcast for this monday night. as we begin a new week, we're on the air tomorrow night the minute the cnn debate is over. thank you for being here with us tonight, and good night from our nbc news headquarters in new york. tonight on "all in," the third witness of the impeachment era. >> arrows continue to point in one direction. >> tonight, what we learned from donald trump's former russia adviser with one of the democrats who was in the room. new reporting on a rudy investigation. >> i'm a pretty good lawyer. >> another impeachment witness suddenly changing his tune. plus senator chris murphy on why the new trump sanctions for turkey are nonsense. >> now i'm sort of an island of one again. >> polling suggests there may be a dark horse canned at a time in iowa not named warren, sanders or biden. "all in" starts right now.
good evening from new york. i'm chris hayes. even as more witnesses come before congress and the cast of characters grow, the central core facts of the ukraine story do not change. we know from documents the white house itself released and through statements by the president himself that the president of the united states corruptly abused the power of his office to coerce an occupied country into manufacturing dirt on his political opponent. the president of ukraine told trump he wanted to buy more american weapons. president trump responded i want to ask you a favor, though. that is what the whistle-blower warned congress about, that is what led house democrats to open an impeachment investigation into the president. what we learned from that investigation hasn't been any better for the president. the third current or former trump administration official testified as part of that investigation and it was another marathon session after former u.s. ambassador to ukraine marie yovanovitch testified friday, fiona hill testified today
for -- well, she's still going. hill say fascinating figure. she was one of the foremost russia experts in the government. she was an intelligence officer with the national intelligence council under president bush and president barack obama. she has written several books on russia, including a critical book on putin entitled "mr. putin." russian and modern history from st. andrews history in scotland. we don't know exactly what hill told congress today. she planned it say rudy giuliani and eu ambassador gordon sondland circumvented the national security council for a shadow policy on ukraine. it shows again the scandal was not an offhand comment trump made on a phone call with ukraine's president but a systematic strategy to use the tools of american state to gain assistance for donald trump in the 2020 election. meanwhile we have this whole other part of this unfolding
scandal. while congress is churning ahead, deposing witnesses, demanding documents and there are big deadlines and witnesses set to testify, the fbi arrested these two soviet-born american citizen businessmen last week on federal campaign corruption charges, just a few hours after those two men had lunch at a trump hotel with rudy giuliani, a man who essentially has taken on the role of the president's fixer. giuliani appears to be the subject of a criminal investigation by the southern district of new york. the office he once ran. we're learning more about giuliani's links to these two sketchy businessmen, including bringing them to president george h.w. bush's funeral last year and their own conflicts of interest immeshed. the other person fiona hill was expected to discuss today was ambassador sondland with that legendary, very normal text, the
president has been crystal clear, no quid pro quos of any kind, trump even pointed to that text, incorrectly calling it a tweet, claiming he was innocent. when sondland testifies before house committees he will say that the content of that text message was relayed to him directly by president trump. the president dictated his own cover story in the midst of the scandal. big question today, what happened behind those closed doors with fiona hill? those who attended her marathon testimony, member of the house intelligence committee. congressman, i know you can't get into the details of what you heard today, but can you describe the testimony? >> in my seven years of congress i would candidly tell you, country, she's the most substantive witness i've observed before any committee
and that's over the course of thousands of hours of testimony. secondly, i believe the woman has an identic memory. if she doesn't have total recall it's very close to it. thirdly in the tenth hour, she had every bit as much energy as she had in the first hour. >> it sounds like she had a lot to say if she's still there. >> she did have an incredible amount to say. i would say about all three witnesses, chris, they've added considerably to get to the bottom of this, the entire truth of how this happened with the president ending up doing a shakedown and a cover-up of his blatant violation of federal law, asking president zelensky of ukraine to interfere in our 2020 presidential elections. everyone has brought something new and different to the table, which has helped to bring in more clearer and stark relief what happened here, and it ain't pretty. >> i'm curious about the trajectory here.
kurt volker came and testified. he no longer worked for the state department. and gordon sondland, who was set to testify this week, was stopped at the last minute, in the middle of the night, white house says now. and marie yovanovitch coming before you. fiona hill coming before you. gordon sondland will come this week. former number two to mike pompeo, mike mckinley is going to come. what's happened here? it's striking to me that the white house, as much as it's trying to stop people from talking to you or turn over documents, it looks like you're getting to talk to people. >> it feels like the dam is breaking. right, chris? i thought the fact that mr. mckinley agreed to come to talk with with us, the day after tomorrow, was significant. he has a career diplomat, has a depth of understanding of how diplomacy should work, has had the most significant diplomatic postings within the state department. i think we'll learn a lot from
him. again, i think we're learning a lot from each and every one. >> how would you describe what you're learning? also explain to me why are these being done as closed door depositions? >> because they're depositions, right? we're conducting this to the highest standards and the best practices of investigations. we're not in the public hearing portion of this yet. we'll get there. but we -- what we don't want is for all of the witnesses, some of whom will be hostile, to coordinate with one another. that will impede us in our effort. >> i see. >> to get to the complete truth. i think that's what the american public wants. obviously they'll want to know all this information at some point. for the time being what they want us to do is get to the truth. >> and you feel like anything you have heard in this witness testimony has been exculpatory for the president or altered your thinking? you're smiling but i'm asking because you're in there and i'm
not. >> we keep getting asked the question in 923 different ways, what did she say to you? of course, we can't answer. i'll reiterate that i think every single person has come before us, has added new information and given new depth to our understanding about what went on here. i think there's enough information in the public domain that as one member, i believe it's clear that the president has committed impeachable offenses but every member is different and how it is they get to that point and whether or not they get to that point. we're not yet at the truth. as we know on an almost every 48 or 72-hour basis, something new happens or some new information comes forward. some of it in public and some of it during these depositions. and so we're kind of trying to ask the question of ourselves, you know, at what point do you have everything? >> yeah. >> because we keep learning more. >> final question, deadlines for document production this week,
including, i believe, from the white house itself, which has said they will not cooperate. do you have a plan in place for what to do if and when they do not turn over those documents? >> chairman schiff has said it well. if they refuse to turn over the documents that, in and of itself, is an act of obstruction to an impeachment inquiry article i. third article of the nixon impeachment was obstructing congress' investigation. and secondly it would be a pretty clear, albeit, tacit, that they're guilty of something, they're hiding something. the shakedown and the cover-up. and that's just part of the cover-up. >> congressmen denny heck, thank you very much. >> you're welcome, sir. two people who have been following this from the beginning, nick ackerman, former u.s. attorney for the southern district of new york and julie ioffe who wrote "here's why ukraine pops up in so many u.s. scandals."
this is what the wall street journal says today. federal prosecutors are investigating rudy giuliani's business meetings. investigators will also examined mr. giuliani's bank records. is this as enormous a deal as it seems to be? >> huge. rudy giuliani was the u.s. attorney in the southern district of new york. he was my boss for six months. he was running that office. don't forget, he was in every aspect of this ukrainian scandal. this is not something that just happened in july. this goes back to april, with the first conversation, and prior to april. >> yeah. >> and the one person who is right in the middle of this entire program is rudy giuliani.
you've got to ask yourself, is he being investigated for violation of the hobbs act for extortion, is he being investigated for bribery, is he being investigated for campaign violation. >> or foreign registration. >> foreign registration is the least of his problems. >> washington post says of gordon sondland key ambassador, that he will intend to testify that trump told him in the oval office that ukraine requests had to go through giuliani and that rudy wanted a written statement promising biden probe. giuliani apparently is going to say sondland -- or says sondland was the one in charge. giuliani is very clearly to me -- i want to hear your perspective on this, tied up in a world he doesn't understand. >> i think it's ironic that this was the law and order mayor of new york, right? and he is now caught in unlawful and disorderly things, let's say. i think you get involved in a
place like ukraine that is tremendously complicated, opaque, even people who are experts in the region have a problem. >> for one second i'll tell folks that is fiona hill leaving her testimony, her deposition today. it's 8:11. i think she was in there about ten hours ago. that's ten hours she stood in front of -- or sat in front of that committee and gave her deposition. go ahead, julie. >> fiona is a case in point. even experts in the region have a hard time getting to the bottom of who stands behind whom. >> exactly. >> everybody isn't just what they appear to be. there's a person behind a person, and then there's like a shall company behind that, and a shall company that owns that shall company. and by the time you figure it out it's not often the person you thought you were dealing with, as f rechlt id, who designed the sanctions against russia for their -- you always
have to know who is buying the drinks in ukraine and i'm not sure rudy giuliani did. >> the picture that emerges is rudy giuliani with a mission. we know what the mission is, right? >> right. >> to go get dirt on hunter -- from the bidens from the ukrainian government and look into the origin of the mueller probe. meeting with with with all sorts of people, advertising to them that the way that you can get close to the president of the united states is if you supply that to him. >> exactly. >> compromise. >> right. and that's just -- when you think about the legal peril he's in there, it's not that that itself is illegal. it's just that it seems to me you put yourself into some very dangerous, gray areas. >> of course you do. then you have mutt and jeff that were arrested the other day. one of them got $1 million from some russian we don't know about. >> not named in the indictment. >> but what does that have to do with vladimir putin and what's putin doing in the 2020 election? this raises really serious questions.
>> i don't want to include a cast of characters that makes people have a hard time following the story, but there are very clear links to a very russian-backed oligarch who is like one degree removed from rudy in all of this. >> right but then there's the unnamed russian national funneling money through brick and brack, or fruman and it's all happening after the mueller investigation wrapped up and trump believed he was exonerated thanks to bill barr, who is also flying around the world, trying to gather similar dirt. there's a lot of weird freelancing happening by people inside the government, outside the government and accountable to nobody. >> and doing things contrary to what the u.s. government does. an indictment charged to 12 russians for breaking into the
democratic national committee and the attorney general and former prosecutor going around, trying to get material, exculpatory information that, god forbid, they ever arrest these guys, they'll use to get out of the crime. >> good point. >> it's outrageous. >> people wanted, especially on the republican side, to have somebody come in and run the country like a business. we have somebody running the company like he ran his personal business. >> like he ran trump org. you go in the oval and trump is saying you have to go through rudy. this is the president of the united states. rudy giuliani doesn't work for the american people, the taxpayer, he doesn't have a position. >> he is not accountable to anybody. >> this is run like the mafia. >> thank you to you both. spin out of control as the white house enters a brand new phase of damage control.
beyond the routine checkups. beyond the not-so-routine cases. comcast business is helping doctors provide care in whole new ways. all working with a new generation of technologies powered by our gig-speed network. because beyond technology... there is human ingenuity. every day, comcast business is helping businesses go beyond the expected. to do the extraordinary. take your business beyond.
before last sunday, the u.s. policy in syria has been to partner with. u.s. decided to work account kurds for a couple of reasons. primarily they have an extraordinary fighting force that helped us push back and defeat isis territorial. two, the kurdish presence helped to limit syrian, by extension russia and iran from getting too much influence. on the other side, nato allies with turkey. the u.s. has tried, across multiple administrations, to manage this very complicated situation between the turks and the kurds so no one gets into a horrifying shooting war. to be clear, all of this was fraught as well help and no one knew the right way out. it was more or less, at least for the time being, working. and then came trump's phone call with turkish strongman erdogan last sunday after which trump, surprising just about everyone,
suddenly announcing u.s. troops would clear the area, home to 200 kurds, so turkey could attack, basically saying to turkey, have at it, announced a withdrawal of u.s. troops. it was a shock to the state department, department of defense, u.s. allies and pretty much everyone in the region, including those kurdish partners on the ground in the fight against isis who we suddenly abandoned. and the news since that decision has been -- well, it's been horrifying. syria escalated their operations, launching artillery rounds near a u.s. outpost. the u.s. will withdrawal all u.s. troops from northern syria, 1,000 u.s. troops moved out of the area over to iraq. it's difficult to confirm all the reports out of the region, video and photographs are circulating on social media that appear to show alleged atrocities carried out by turkish fighters. the kurds have now decided to cut a deal with syrian dictator bashir alassad for protection, extending his power throughout
most of the territory. the situation with isis, kurds holding isis terrorists and allies in jails said clees cloes to 800 members of the camp had escaped after turkish shelling. united states had failed to transfer 5 dozen islamic detainees out of the country. facing what is universally seen as a strategic and humanitarian disaster, trump is making noise about how he's going to get tough on turkey. facing pressure from congress, ordering sanctions on turkish officials, vice president mike pence out saying that trump called e. are dogan asking him to stop the invasion, and that pence is going to turkey as soon as possible. covering national security in the new book shadow of the nations, isis. >> you've been in this part of
the region. >> i have, with the kurds. >> what does this military push mean for the stability and balance of power in the region? >> these were some of the most stable places in syria and where isis was the strongest. when the u.s. came into syria and started working with the kurds, it was a disaster. isis seemed unstoppable at the time. through this partnership and more than 10,000 kurdish soldiers killed, they were able to stabilize. kurds were able to control it and able to bring some semblance of order. that's important because isis is not dead, no matter how trump says and how he defeated it. they are a threat in these areas. they've gone back to their roots as an insurgency. kurds and american troops until eight days ago were working to roll up those networks and eliminate that threat. and now all of that is gone. >> when you say all that have is gone, first of all, it seems there's reporting today that all
anti-isis fighting from the coalition has essentially stopped. you mean the fighters will reconstitute again? >> that's always been the risk. "new york times" had a report that there were still 18,000 isis fighters across iraq and seara. these are the guys fighting america during the iraq war. this is al qaeda. their roots are insurgency. they've just gone back to that. you mentioned that it was a sticky situation. everyone involved realized how sticky the situation was that, this partnership needed to continue because isis is still a major threat and needed to do counterinsurgency operations with the kurds to roll that up. it's over now, as you mentioned. >> out of desperation, the kurds were part of the fighting forces against the syrian regime of bashir al assad have turned to assad. which means after going down to
a quarter of syria with russian and iranian intervention, and now this moment, assad has reconstituted. >> right. they were really clear eyed about what civil war means and they were careful not to get involved. they had an agreement with the regime from the beginning. we're going to control our areas but won't rebel against you. because of that, isis attacked them. they control oil fields in the kurdish region. they control oil refineries and lots of valuable real estate. the war kind of came to them. and then partnership with the u.s. began. and now the same soldiers that the u.s. trained, armed, think about it this way from a counterintelligence standpoint. soldiers who worked with the most elite united states military are now going to work with assad and russia and bring you all that knowledge with them and by force, with no other choice saying hey, please protect us. they don't have any leverage and what goes on after that. >> what do you think -- what
happens now? >> i mean, i think the easiest thing to say, but the only certain thing we can say is chaos, right? and just this sort of put the warning out there that isis thrives in chaos. it's possible that the thousands of isis prisoners, including european foreign fighters escaped, it's possible that the syrian regime takes them, not a trustworthy partner in counterterrorism, it's possible these turkish forces take them, not at all trustworthy either. >> it was always an untenable situation. the bomb is defused as long as everyone's hand is on it and eventually someone has to get up and leave the building. this is accelerating what would have been a disaster. >> two things. first of all, there could have
been a serious u.s. effort to make some sort of acceptable agreement here and bring stability long term. so if the u.s. had had any kind of diplomacy or strategy, they could have said hey, we control a force of 60,000 fighters in syria. we could be part of negotiations with the regime, turkey, to try to find some semblance for them long term and the second part of that, we didn't have to throw the bomb down right in front of ourselves. if there was going to be a u.s. pullout, it could have been orderly. u.s. troops are retreating. the news headlines say retreat, turkish-backed forces, according to the u.s. times, were firing on u.s. troops as they were retreating. there was no planning whatsoever. that's why all these worst case scenarios are playing out. >> mike, thank you so much for being with me. >> thanks for having me. next, the situation continues to spiral, senator chris murphy is one of the best people to make sense of the fallout from the president's decision. he joins me after this.
as u.s. turkish relations spiral downward, weapons are sitting on turk irk soil. the government is apparently trying to figure out how to get them out, according to reporting in "the new york times" over the weekend state and energy department officials were quietly reviewing plans for evacuating roughly 50 tactical nuclear weapons the u.s. had long stored under american control at incirlik air base in trky, about 250 miles from the sear yab border. those weapons are essentially now erdogan's hostages. democrat of the foreign relations committee, senator you and i both share some healthy skepticism of foreign policy
consensus, particularly in the american era of endless war, but this does seem terrible what's going on. how bad is this from your point of view? >> i thought the most important point that mike giglio made in the prior segment was this was all avoidable. you and i do share this sense there's never been a plan from the start as to how the united states was going to unwind its intervention in syria, 2,000 troops was never permanently going to be able to stop the turks from moving in, but there absolutely was this opportunity, as mike pointed out, for a political process in which a u.s.-led effort would try to figure out which kurds the turks could live with in northeastern syria and which ones had to be moved somewhere else. we never even attempted to work that out. for long periods of time we had only one diplomat in northeastern syria. so, there was no chance to ultimately do anything than
fight the turks ourselves or wave them through. this, to me, is so tragic, because all of it could have been avoidable, had trump decided to do the diplomatic work ahead of the american pullout. >> on the nuclear weapons point, obviously the relationship with turkey is fraught for a million different reasons and has been for a long time. do you give credence to those reports? david sanger piece in "the new york times," does that worry you? >> it does. listen, we do have to step back and assess what kind of security partnership we're willing to have with the turks. this is the latest in what has been a long series of moves by the turks that suggest they don't really want to be in a long-term mutual defense relationship with the united states. beginning of the syria conflict, we were begging the turks to shut down the border because they were actively waving through isis personnel and resources into syria so they could create problems for the syrian regime and the kurds
frchlt the beginning of this conflict there's been real questions as to whether the turks are serious about about being in business with us and whether it's the nuclear weapons, arms sales or nato membership we do have taupe back and have some wholesale conversation about our relationship. >> one of the weird things that's happening here, we saw that statement put up after the call by erdogan took everyone by surprise. literally, i don't think anyone saw that coming. it basically said look, they have a green light. we're going to move our troops out of position so they can go in. there's this weird overcompensation happening now where the president is like he's going to destroy their economy, hiking steel tariffs, withdrawing the remaining u.s. troops from syria, going to -- he wants to sanction them. >> right. >> lindsey graham is working on sanctions. i don't know what sense to make of this very strange after effect anger being directed.
>> yeah. it's sort of the much more monstrous equivalent of telling your kid that he can stay out past curfew and then when he comes back after curfew, you ground him for three months. he announced the invasion before turkey announced it sunday night. he grlt green lit this invasion and now is panicking because he found out absolutely no one in the republican party, democratic party or foreign establishment that thinks what he did is a good idea and it's turning out to be just as horrible and horrific as what we said it was going to be. now you're going to get the worst of all worlds. >> right. >> the kurds getting in bed with assad, humanitarian catastrophe on the ground, ad hoc sanctions that will push the turks closer to axis with iran, splintered nato. none of that is good for the united states and it all could have been avoided. you're getting the worst of all worlds now. >> i want to ask you a question about ukraine. you have been, as a u.s.
senator, quite invested in the u.s./ukrainian relationship. you visited there with the late john mccain there. we talked to you after coming back from one of those trips. as you watch this, do you have moments you go oh, now i understand things that were weird to me at the time? >> yeah. listen, as you know i was the first person to raise questions about this back in the spring and we were worried from the very beginning that there was this quid pro quo relationship and we now know that it, indeed, did exist. you know, we've also wondered from the very beginning, you know, why the state department or diplomatic core basically had been left unstaffed. and i think part of the reason we're figuring out is that the president wanted to do his own side deals.
his own side deals that had, at its foundation, political interests. that's harder to do if you have smart career public servants doing your diplomacy. if you get rid of those folks and have no acting ambassador for ukraine or european affairs, it's easier for political hacks like rudy giuliani to be able to fill that void. that makes more sense to me now. >> senator chris murphy as always, thanks for making time. >> still ahead why national polling may not be telling the whole story in the democratic race. dark horse coming up. in't easy.
they have businesses to grow customers to care for lives to get home to they use stamps.com print discounted postage for any letter any package any time right from your computer all the amazing services of the post office only cheaper get our special tv offer a 4-week trial plus postage and a digital scale
go to stamps.com/tv and never go to the post office again! thing one tonight. we talked about donald trump's cozy relationship with the saudis. on his very first overseas trip as president, saudi arabia. i think everyone remembers from that visit is the orb. trump, king salman and the egyptian president all gathered around it and kept their hands on it for nearly two minutes, like they were summoning dark forces or something. something else happened on that trip that didn't get enough attention. sawed a arabia's really not great military band. ♪
vladimir putin in saudi arabia was greeted with pomp and circumstance. they made him walk down a mile of carpet. putin didn't arrive empty handed, he brought along a russian falcon for the king, young female named alpha. woopsy daisy. that will happen with live animals. ceremonial playing of the russian national anthem not at all improved saudi national band whose motto is we never at all practice. ♪
(danny) of course you don't because you didn't! your job isn't doing hard work... ...it's making them do hard work... ...and getting paid for it. (vo) snap and sort your expenses to save over $4,600 at tax time. quickbooks. backing you. whether your beauty routine is 3or 57,... make nature's bounty hair skin and nails step one. it's the number one brand uniquely formulated for silky hair, glowing skin and healthy nails. nature's bounty, because you're better off healthy.
over the last few weeks as impeachment has dominated the news and this show i've been watching with increasing horror and bafflement as the nba, for fear of offending the chinese government and basketball fans. after a single tweet in support of the hong kong supporters, the nba has scrambled to lock down any other signs of criticism of the chinese government, hoping to keep access to a lucrative sport. choosing the path of least resistance, quite familiar in the news because it's what so many republican members of congress do every day, when confronted with the bigotry, by the man who is head of their party.
it is not limbed to them. insidious force of path of least resistance is everywhere you look. i feel the tug of it myself as my own news organization is embroiled in a very public controversy over its conduct. in his new book "catch and kill," ronan farrow says that msnbc slow walked and killed his reporting on harvey weinstein's sexual harassment and assault. farrow suggests nbc news was worried about sexual harassment and assault by matt lauer coming out and desperately wanted to avoid that. in farrow's view he was unable to break through what was effectively a conspiracy of silence from nbc news management. nbc news vigorously denies this account. president of nbc news called farrow's book a conspiracy theory in a memo sent out today, citing an internal nbc news
investigation, saying that the allegations against lauer were not known. since farrow's departure two years ago, the weinstein story was never broadcast because it lacked sufficient on the record sourcing even after nbc supported farrow's assignment for seven months. one thing, though, is indisputable. ronan farrow walked out and within two months published an incredible article that not only won a pulitzer but help aid social reckoning that continues to this day. it's the kind of journalism that you want to do as a journalist, that everyone who works in this business should want to facilitate. of course there's a reason it took so long for the true story about weinstein to be told, many allegations to stay locked in a vault.
time and again the path of least resistance for those of power was not to cross weinstein or his army of friends and lawyers. same goes for the many, many, many other powerful predators we've come to know about. the path of least resistance is always there. beckoning seductively, you've got bigger fish to fry. this isn't the hill to die on. the story isn't ready. it's the very ease of that path that makes it the enemy to the kind of work we, as journalists, are supposed to do. ♪
hey. hey. you must be steven's phone. now you can take control of your home wifi and get a notification the instant someone new joins your network... only with xfinity xfi. download the xfi app today. tomorrow night, a record 12 democratic candidates running for president will appear on one stage in the fourth debate in this primary race. the last debate was about a month ago, and over the course of that month, the race has changed in some fundamental ways, and in some fundamental ways it has not. one fundamental way it has not changed is that vice president joe biden hasn't really lost support. he's basically been more or less flat over the past month. what has changed is that senator elizabeth warren has gained support, and the two of them, indisputably in the polling
average are basically tied. now everyone is wondering what their dynamic will be like meeting each other as essentially tied for the first time. a better thing to keep in mind is there is still a ton of movement, for changes beyond just national polling, particularly if you logistic at, say, iowa. in a poll this weekend, iowa is a three-way dead heat with mayor pete buttigieg putting up a solid number in fourth place. it's easy to forget how much an early victory can alter people's perceptions of these race, especially when you're this many months out. we'll talk about the dynamics going into tomorrow night's debate, i want to bring in strategist margie omero, and elena schneider. the polling seems to show one thing indisputably. warren is growing. she has picked up support. she has enlarged her coalition. she still has obstacles. right now can she essentially take some of those biden voters away? is that how you see it? >> you're right. there has been a trend where she's gained steam over the last few weeks and months.
i think we should caution. i know you mentioned this, but i just want the caution again is you have a lot of democratic primary voters who are still making up their mind. >> yep. >> even those who say they have a choice, about half of them say they could change their mind. and even that may change. even that number may change as things evolve and whether we're talking about iowa polling and what's happening in iowa is different than what's happening nationally. and you have a lot of voters who are still waiting to see and learn more from the candidates and see what happens once we start voting. so i want the start with that. but, yeah, as i see it, certainly the trend where warren on the move is something that we've seen now for a while, and we'll see if that continues over the next few weeks. >> elena, there has been an interesting dynamic with this race in that sanders and elizabeth warren are fairly close to each other idealogically. they represent similar wings of the party, although their surrogates have been going at each other a little bit
recently. there is some wonder about the degree to warren's rise is coming at sander's expense. i thought this -- i also having interviewed both of them and knowing both of them fairly well, they do genuinely like each other as people. they have a good relationship. i thought this quote from bernie sanders was fascinating. i want to get your sense how these two campaigns are thinking about each other. this is what sanders had to say sunday on abc. >> elizabeth warren has been a friend of mine for some 25 years, and i think she is a very, very good senator. but there are differences between elizabeth and myself. elizabeth i think as you know has said that she is a capitalist through her bones. i'm not. >> this -- what do you make of that comment? >> well, what i make of it is even though we are still four months away from iowa, we're four months away from iowa, and candidates are starting to run out of time. and bernie sanders in particular has been through a really difficult couple of weeks. he suffered a heart attack. this debate is going to be the first time where he'll be back on stage after a real serious health scare. and i think he is seeing his
poll numbers continue to slowly chip away, slowly fall heading in a direction he does not want to see them go both nationally and in iowa, and somewhere where he feels he is leaking or bleeding some support is to elizabeth warren. as you noted at the top, has suddenly risen in the polls. even though they certainly do have a very cordial relationship, that by and large those two have not actually gone up against each other, they've been sort of a tag team in defense of progressive policies, that i think in this debate we might start to see them go after each other. >> my hunch is that that won't happen, at least not yet, although anything is possible. i think what's interesting about that quote from sanders is oh, she is a capitalist, which i imagine elizabeth warren saying oh, don't throw me in that briar patch. don't call me capitalist running for president in 2019. there is also a fact, margie, when you look at that iowa polling which is a really good remind other telephone three-way races, there is a really good tie. things in these narratives change so quickly.
i remember howard dean was going win iowa and john kerry won it and ran the table. i remember how barack obama was going to win every other state and hillary clinton won new hampshire in 2008 and it was an extended win. it does strike me as we focus on the national polling for the dynamics of the race, the significance of iowa being that close i think hasn't quite set in with people about where the stand -- where the race actually stands. >> right. the other thing is iowa is a state where people have organizations on the ground. >> right. >> they're out meeting voters. they're on the air. that's not the same as what's happening nationally. you have more candidates making more connections in iowa in some way than you do nationally. so it's important to remember that. and we've only had a couple of polls since labor day. that's different from the national polling landscape outlet. and the last thing, we're thinking about who's second choice is we don't have a lot of public tools that give us the ability to really look at which candidate polls from whomever, and people are looking at the overall trend-lines. but when you a national poll and
a subsample of, that that's democratic primary voters nationally, then you don't have enough respondents for a lot of these candidates to see -- >> right. >> -- who is second choice. there are a couple of places you can see that publicly. but we just are not able to have that kind of granular work from the public polling. obviously internal polls have different ways of doing that. >> also, pete buttigieg this week has been somewhat interesting. he had a line in an interview about fundraising where he said you can't beat republicans with chump change, talking about, i think, bernie sanders and elizabeth warren who have raised huge amounts of money through small dollar donors. it does seem to me that buttigieg has his eyes on basically fashioning himself authentically to who he is as a non-sanders warren alternative who is also not biden. elena? >> i think he is leaning hard into being that middle ground. >> right. >> somewhere between the spectrum of biden and warren and bernie.
but:00 loo, i think an important point for buttigieg is not only has he really leaned into both, he has been the darling of high dollar fundraisings and donors, certainly has leaned into that element of the democratic party that both warren and sanders have rejected, but he also has a very robust small dollar donor network. he averaged $32 last quarter, and elizabeth warren averaged $26. that's not a huge difference between the two of them. and he has been able to grow that grassroots network and sort of run a dual high and low-dollar program. certainly maybe he wants to draw some contrasts between himself and sanders and warren both on the money front and on health care policy of late. but look, he is sort of leaning into both in his own campaign. >> all right, margie omero. >> you folks looking for something fun to do on a monday night this time next week? i'll be getting ready to take the stage in downtown l.a. with adam mckay and omar el akkad. if you're passionate about climate change, i think you're
going to love this conversation. tickets are available now, msnbc.com with pod tour. rachel maddow starts right now. plus, another witness, another former insider tells congress over another marathon session what she knows and what she saw from inside the west wing. also tonight there's a new attempt to fix the brutal turkish military campaign, an attempt to cover the american forces who have been ordered to retreat. all of it, of course, the result of one trump phone call and the green light it conveyed as "the 11th hour" gets under way on a monday night.