tv All In With Chris Hayes MSNBC August 1, 2013 12:00am-1:01am PDT
destroy the u.s. credit rating. terrorists with one purpose to bring down this administration, the american government, just watch. and the fact is, the likelihood out there is that this crew could be the one that crashes the republican convention next time. and that fortunately could be the end of them. that's hardball, for now, thanks for being with us. "all in with chris hayes" starts right now. good evening from new york. i'm chris hayes, tonight on all in, what would happen if police officers accused of targeting, stopping and questioning men of color had to meet with those men face to face after the fact to discuss themselves. today we get cops to sit down with the very people accusing them of racial profiling. also, ken cuccinelli is best known for his war on women.
plus, there are some truly amazing name calling happening right now among republicans, but the fight that's unfolding among conservatives is about so much more than who's the king of bacon. we'll tackle the ever bloodier battle on the right over everything from earmarks to foreign policy to whether or not to shut down the government. but we begin tonight with growing momentum among the nation's lawmakers to reign in the secret government. today senators from both parties grilled officials from the fbi and nsa about the lack of transparency around the nation's sprawling surveillance operation. signalling the defunding of the nsa's phone records. they will force the government to reveal how many americans have had their information reviewed by federal agents.
this as president obama on the hill today, assured lawmakers he was hearing their concerns about the reach of the nsa and even agreed to meet with a number of them at the white house tomorrow. today meetings came just hours after the administration announced they would be declassifying the now infamous secret court order compelling verizon to hand over all their american customer's phone records in bulk. that was edward snowden's first revelation, the one that kicked this whole thing off. today we got his latest. the piece published by glenn greenwald, with documents provided by snowden, details another nsa surveillance program, a top secret national security agency program that allows analysts to search with no prior authorization through vast databases containing e-mails, online chats and the browsing history of millions of individuals. those details of yet another nsa surveillance program are sure to add to the momentum decidedly, sharply, i would say surprisingly in one direction.
momentum that today led to a scenario that just six months ago would have been unthinkable. keith alexander, the head of the nsa, one of the most powerful men in the world, a man who up until now has been content in the shadows, defending himself on video, before a crowd peppered with hecklers. >> our nation takes stopping terrorism as one of the most important things. >> freedom. >> exactly. and with that, when you think about it, how do we do that. because we stand for freedom. [ bleep ]. >> not that. but i think what you're saying is that in these cases, what's the decision, where's the discussion, and what tools should we have to stop those?
>> they don't trust you. >> you lied to congress, why would we believe you're not lying to us right now. >> i haven't lied to congress. >> joining me now, a member of the senate judiciary committee, is working on legislation to revise the fisa court. what are the main approaches of this massive surveillance operation the u.s. is running. >> i supported al franken and udall on making the rules and orders and opinions on the fisa court which are disclosed. senator franken's effort on the numbers of certain kinds of invasive actions by the government.
my focus is equally important on the process. on the fisa court itself, how is it selected? right now it's only by the chief justice of the united states supreme court, john roberts, acting alone without any kind of review. >> just so folks are clear here, the foreign surveillance intelligence act set up this secret court. the court itself is secret, the judges are appointed by john roberts in secret. there is no adversarial process. it's simply a government lawyer coming before this secretly appointed judge with no one on the other side. >> that's right, and that's the second important element of my program, which is that there should be some adversarial process there, should be some kind of special advocate who takes the point of view on the facts and the law, perhaps very different. die ya metrically opposed, testing the government, challenging it, just as we do. in the normal court.
the adversarial process is the way the court gets to the truth. in any other search and seizure situation. i'm a former federal prosecutor, i know about it well, there is a period of time when the warrant can be kept secret, the search and seizure may be done, but eventually it's tested by rules of admissibility in open court. >> as a united states senator, as you look at the revelations we've had over the last six weeks to a month, how much of this did you know, and how much of this is news to you. how much are you learning about what the government that you are charged with overseeing and holding accountable is doing from the newspaper and how much of this do you know? >> the revelations about the magnitude the scope and kale of these surveillances, the metadata and the invasive actions surveillance of social media websites were indeed
revelations to me. now, the senate of the united states has an intelligence committee which operates much of the time in secret, ron widen, senator widen my colleague has actually made speeches on the floor of the senate saying the american people would be outraged. i'm paraphrasing, dissatisfied or frightened. i can't tell you why if they knew about these rulings. we may need to relook at some of the procedures for oversight and scrutiny. >> here's the question to you, is the last month many the news about surveillance and privacy and secrecy, has it been a net benefit to american democracy? is it better that we now know what we did not know a month to six weeks ago? >> i'm concerned about the damage that may have been done to our security. and i'm going only by what i've heard in public, today's testimony being an example from the intelligence community or officials in that community. so the potential danger or
damage to our stopping terrorists, greatly concerns me, because this work is necessary. and we tend to forget this far removed from 9/11, how frightened we were in the wake of that tragic and horrific incident. but at the same time there clearly is a need for balance. and the fisa court, the foreign intelligence surveillance court is responsible for striking that balance and it ought to be more transparent, more accountable. there ought to be an adversarial process, so that some point of view tests the government's fact and legal theory, especially and primarily when there are novel or significant issues of law. that's the way the other system works in a criminal context in our criminal system. >> thank you so much for your time. joining me now is glenn greenwald. glenn broke the edward snowden
story in the guardian. i am getting confused, okay? i have to say, totally honestly, when a new braham is described and i read several times the article. i can't tell if what i'm reading about is basically a software interface tool that people are using to get data that's already being grabbed by other programs or under different authorization or a distinct program of surveillance, it seemed to me today that we're reading about a tool that allows analysts to search from data that is being collected under legal authority of the fisa court, is that correct? >> no, that is not correct. the program is a dual use tool, it is a tool that allows analysts to search the entire database, it's also a program for collecting data. the nsa's own documents describe it as a tool designed to collect nearly everything a user does on the internet.
quote quote quote quote
it's designed to collect that and store it into databases. the database you're talking about has 41 billion internet records stored each and every month for a 30 day period. what is different about it, is that unlike surveillance under the fisa court, the analyst sits at his or her desk and search for things when they don't even know the person they're searching for. they can search just by general key word or they search e-mail accounts for certain words or search browser histories or google searches for names and assign suspicion to people and track them. it has nothing to do with the fisa court. it's necessary when you're targeting a u.s. person. this database concerns loss of u.s. persons but it's done completely independent of the fisa court. >> they have to clear some bar of justification for the foreignness of the person that
scope of the law as they understand it, and there are very serious violations, there's virtually no oversight on these analysts. they type four words, we think he's foreign. nobody checks or monitors or approves of what they're doing and they're often running with extremely invasive experience. >> that seems like the big issue in question here. the defenders i've been reading and talking about will talk about the insti tuksal culture of the place. it's possible that there are thousands of irs agents who can pull up people's tax returns. they say a lot of things about you, there are thousands of irs agents that could order audits. the thing that stops that largely is an institutional culture in which people realize they're going to be caught if they do that, possibly go to jail, face sanction, face the end of their careers, and the people that defend the nsa say that same thing exists in the nsa, you have to distinguish between the capacity and the
institutional norms stop people from doing. what's your response to that argument? >> i have two responses to that argument. if the nsa were free of serious abuse, it would be the first time in history that a massive strong potent surveillance system was created in the dark with no checks and human beings didn't abuse it. the history of the united states should lead anyone to realize that building a massive surveillance
state will lead to abuse. that was the lessen of the church committee, for decades the united states government abused surveillance because nobody was looking over their shoulder to see what they were doing. they eavesdropped on martin luther king and the anti-war movement. secondly, as secret as the nsa is, we know there's serious abuse, in 2011, there was an 86-page ruling from the fisa court saying what the nsa was doing, systematically violated
the constitution and the law. ron whiting just this week got james clapper to admit there are numerous violations of the law that the nsa is committing and they try to slough it off and say it's not intentional. it's much more serious than the government is letting on. the problem is, it's all done in secret, the lesson of the united states historically, over the last century, is that if you build the surveillance system and don't have very aggressive oversight it will inevitably be abused. >> not just the lesson of the united states, i would say. glenn greenwald, thank you so much. there are hundreds of complaints of racial profiling by los angeles police officers each year. now the lapd is set to launch an experimental program to confront the cops they accuse of targeting them face to face. it's been that way since the day you met. but your erectile dysfunction - it could be a question of blood flow.
cialis tadalafil for daily use helps you be ready anytime the moment's right. you can be more confident in your ability to be ready. and the same cialis is the only daily ed tablet approved to treat ed and symptoms of bph like needing to go frequently or urgently. tell your doctor about all your medical conditions and medications, and ask if your heart is healthy enough for sexual activity. do not take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain, as this may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. do not drink alcohol in excess with cialis. side effects may include headache, upset stomach, delayed backache or muscle ache. to avoid long-term injury, seek immediate medical help for an erection lasting more than 4 hours. if you have any sudden decrease or loss in hearing or vision, or if you have any allergic reactions such as rash, hives, swelling of the lips, tongue or throat, or difficulty breathing or swallowing, stop taking cialis and get medical help right away. ask your doctor about cialis for daily use and a 30-tablet free trial. it's sleep train's interest-free for 3 event! get 3 years interest-free financing on beautyrest black, stearns & foster,
serta icomfort, even tempur-pedic. plus, get free delivery and sleep train's 100-day low price guarantee. you'll never find an interest rate lower than sleep train's interest-free for 3 event, on now! superior service, best selection, lowest price, guaranteed! ♪ sleep train ♪ your ticket to a better night's sleep ♪ imagine you were stopped and frisked by a cop and then you
got to meet that cop and discuss why you were frisked. a story we've been following, today in chicago, detroit and flint, michigan. thousands of fast food retailers went on strike. they're pushing for a wage increase to $15 an hour, and the right to form unions without fear of retaliation. we will continue to follow these strikes on this program and on our website all in with chris.
they came to recognize p it was done in a fair, straightforward way, it would allow them to do their jobs better, and communities would have more confidence in them and in turn be more helpful. in applying the law. >> talking about the death of trayvon martin a little over a week ago, president obama spoke about the straightforward principle of having police officers listen to actions. the goal of this kind of approach is to reduce the frustration that many black and brown people feel when they're targets of heightened police scrutiny, and that's why yesterday congressman john conyers and senator ben karnen introduced the end rashlg profiling ability of 2012. and it's the same reason why the los angeles police department gave the go ahead yesterday for a brand new program that will give an officer accused of
racial profiling and his or her accuser a chance to meet face to face in a room and talk about the incident. this will be a three-year pilot program in which participation will be voluntary on both sides. it will be used in instances of which there are no allegations of physical abuse or racial insults. under the leadership of bill bratton, an internal investigation looking at more than 300 complaints of racial profiling, found that one accusation it received in 2007 had any merit. the aclu looked at the same data that year and saw that african-americans and hispanics are overstopped, overfrisked and over arrested. there were more stops of black and hispanics in a single year. joining me now is antonio villaraigosa, former democratic mayor of los angeles. it's a great pleasure to have you here. >> it's a great pleasure to be
on the show with you. first of all -- >> you're chomping at the bit. l.a. is not new york, we don't do stop and 23rising. >> it's not a policy of the lapd, the mayor's office. >> absolutely. >> it's not something you have in place with numbers that you -- >> that's exactly right. this program, while just passed tuesday by the police commissioner, which i appointed. is a program that has its genesis in eight years of focusing on what we call constitutional policing. we believe you could be safer when you start from the proposition that nobody's above the law, not even a police officer, a politician or a priest. and so this program is an opportunity to put two people face to face, the police officer who arrested an individual or who is being complained about and the individual who's made that complain. and what i think we'll find, certainly what they found in san
francisco, when people have an opportunity to get in someone else's shoes, they maybe understand what happened a little better and get more sensitive to the issue. >> it caught our eye today because i think it's a great idea. the one concern i have, the review board talks about the complain the. they have a mediation program too. it's entirely voluntary. if you look, you get something like 7,664 complaints and how many go to mediation. >> san francisco's done this program replicating a program that they've done for some time now, it's been fairly successful, with he hope it will be successful, here's a three-year program, we'll put metrics to it, when i say we, the police commission. i'm not -- >> you're not -- >> i'm not there any more. >> here's my question for you. you had a really unique perspective, i felt. you have been president of the aclu in los angeles.
first latino mayor of the city, you came from communities that often find themselves frustrated by the treatment on behalf of the police. and at the same time, you're running a city, crime is an issue. you're running the police department, you're not the commissioner of the police, you oversee it. >> 49% drop in homicides and violent crime in the eight years i was mayor. >> if that's the case in los angeles, when you hear ray kelly and mayor bloomberg say the drop is due to stop and frisk, what do you say to that? >> new york and l.a. are two different cities. where part of why our crime went down as much as it did we grew our police department. we focused on constitutional policing. we diversified our police department. you talk about people of color. about 64% of the department is now of color. latinos are the largest ethnic group of any group in the department. we're almost 20% women.
so the people that we've hired now are much more, to a greater degree, come from parts of l.a. and those communities. they speak more than one language. they're connected to that community. we focus on communities policing. we have a very -- we have the largest gang challenge in the united states of america and we focus on prevention and intervention. >> and you set up these gang centers -- >> you've also been very outspoken about the need for immigration reform. you're also someone who's been on both sides of protesting a person in power and sitting in the mayor's office with protesters outside. you have been, and i think it's an interesting perspective. my question to you is, when you hear there's immigration activists of civil disobedience, can it be effective, does civil disobedience, as someone who's been on both sides of that, does that work? >> absolutely, it does work. the question is, will it work with some of the extremists that are in the house.
look, on a bipartisan basis, democrats and republicans passed a comprehensive immigration bill, which was tough on the border. mccain said yesterday, a lot tougher than it needed to be. >> it's an insane boone dog el. but put that aside. >> we needed to get the votes and we got them. the people in the house are very different. they want to do a piecemeal approach that won't include a pathway to citizenship. they want to toughen that border even more, without the dollars to do it. they wants to allow states and municipalities to do the work of immigration. >> and the big question is, with those priors are they subject to any kind of pressure we're going to see, former los angeles mayor, thank you so much for your time. >> thank you for having me. even if you're not a resident of virginia, you probably heard of the republican attorney general now running for governor. he's targeting women's reproductive rights to certain kinds of sex.
a state that learning how to deal with scandal, is now taking front and center in this campaign ad. >> designed to intimidate and suppress. >> ken cuccinelli used funds to investigate a professor on climate change. >> cuccinelli is focused on his own agenda, not us. >> he waged a witch hunt of intimidation, persecution and bullying against one of the top climate scientists in the country. a man who happened to be teaching at the university of virginia. his role as attorney general, cuccinelli issued a subpoena for e-mails, notes drafts and other research.
he did not have the legal authority to demand such records. he spent $570,000 in legal fees, raised from private funds. cuccinelli used taxpayer dollars for his side of the fight. he did so to destroy and discredit one of the most prominent people in the scientific community. a scientist who is warning us what is happening to our earth, global warming. which is shown in this video covering the past few decades, all that's supported from temperature data from nasa. ken cuccinelli decided to wage war. michael mann from penn state university joins me.
mcauliffe is leading over ken cuccinelli. what would you tell people? >> virginia ans have a very stark choice before them. on the one hand, you have terry mcauliffe who embraces science and technology, who recognizes that technological innovation is what's going to help virginia compete in the world of economy. and on the other hand you have ken cuccinelli, someone who views science as something to attack if it doesn't comport with his ideological views or the views of the special interest that funds his campaigns. >> why did he go after you? >> well, i published 15 years ago this graph called a hockey stick that shows how
unprecedented recent global warming is, and it became an icon in the climate change debate. i described my experiences as this sort of accidental public figure in the climate change debate because of this graph we published. i talk about how over the past 15 years my co authors and i, have been subject to a crescendo of attacks by politicians, typically aligned with fossil fuel interests or front groups advocating for the fossil fuel industry that see the need to discredit this iconic graphic. >> you're someone, you describe yourself in the book as reluctant and you describe the experience of what it's like to be singled out like this, to have the attorney general of the state going after you, while you're working in that state's universities is no small thing. my question to you is, now that in some ways you have entered the fray with this ad, do you worry that you are essentially giving away your image as independent as a scientist?
>> well, you know, as a scientist, i try to be nonpartisan, i try to talk about the facts, because the facts alone speak volumes when it comes to the issue of climate change, and the need to do something about it, unfortunately, whether you like it or not, whether you're a climate scientist, you're going to be attacked by special interests who want to discredit you, who want to kill the messenger in an effort to try to discredit the case for concern over climate change. you're going to be in the center of attacks. and have you to decide what you're going to do with that, i chose to fight back. i saw it necessary not just to defend my own reputation against attacks, efforts to discredit me, but also to make sure that it was clear to my fellow scientists that we shouldn't just lie back and allow special interests to discredit us.
they've called each other everything from dangerous to sad and cheap to the king of bacon. the chris christie/rand paul smackdown is about more than personal animosity. the talk to conservatives on both sides of this battle next. first, i want to share the three most awesomist things on the internet today. marina had been hypnotizing audiences for decades. perhaps her most difficult task to date was a video she made to help raise funds for her proposed institute.
she tells a joke. how many hours does a performance artist need to change a light bulbs. >> how many light bulbs you need -- oh, god. how many performance artists we need -- >> i was not long enough. i can't do it i don't know, i was there only six hours. >> nailed it. now, granted she's not going to headline at the comedy store any time soon. you can rest assured her three minute video is funnier than the entire cast of summer camp 2. the cookie monster is trying
to -- mccrory hand delivered a bunch of cookies and described him selecting a woman from the crowd to receive them. he handed her the plate of cookies and waved as he walked away. she was too stunned to say anything back. the internet traded reproductive rights for chocolate chips. and burning the #letthemeat cookies. sorry, i made a decision about your body for you. here, have some chocolate. you women like chocolate, right? and the third awesomist thing on the internet today, a guaranteed hollywood legend. denzel washington is in a movie, he wants you to know he means what he says. denzel making guarantees.
>> she'll be here, i guarantee you. >> i can guarantee you that i will see to it that harper does not ignore that. >> i'm going to find out the truth, i guarantee that. >> it's become such a catch phrase for denzel, even fellow celebs can't resist busting out in an impersonation. >> don't matter if i'm on this case or not, i'm going to find out the truth, i guarantee it. >> denzel's new movie features his compulsion for promises he backs up. >> it ain't down there, i can guarantee you that.
someone like senator paul and others in that isolationist wing, the republicans had this debate back in the 1930s when you had the isolationists and the lindberghs who said, we should appease hitler. then the anti-war movement blamed america first. i'm afraid that's what senator paul is going to do with us. >> oh, he and went there, all right. invoking hitler while taking a swipe at rand paul of kentucky right now, the party's political ambitions are going through a game of throwns style battle for supremacy.
it's become akin to something like sectarian violence. this is a war with multiple fronts from foreign policy to surveillance to earmarks to shutting down the government over obama care. shifting alliances, defending different pieces of terrain, and yes, there is bacon. perhaps the most entertaining fight of the week comes from two would be hopefuls and governor chris christie. christie criticized the party's libertarian shift, accusing paul of engaging inness sew terik debates. rand paul hit back, accusing neo-cons of christie and king of harming national security by running for federal disaster relief. noting the amount of federal dollars kentucky receives in relation to the amount of money it gives, christie asked paul to lay off the pork. >> i doubt he would. because most washington politicians only care about bringing home the bacon so they
can get re-elected. >> rand paul couldn't resist the layup. >> bacon, talking about bacon, he's making a big mistake picking a fight with other republicansing. the republican party is shrinking in new england and the northeast part of our country. i'm the one trying to grow the party. >> christie says he has nothing personal against paul, but paul may have something personal against him. >> seeing his response, he has something personal against me, that's okay, just get in line on that front. >> paul offered to share a beer with christie, in hopes of ironing out their differences. his rhetoric didn't seem to change all that much. >> those of us who are conservative and believe in a strong national defense, how do you have enough funding? i'm willing to cut entire departments. my problem with some of the more liberal members of the republican party is, they're not willing to cut spending other places in order to preserve national defense. >> joining me now is robert george, editorial writer for new york post, josh barrel and tim
carnie, senior political columnist for the washington examiner. visiting fellow at the enterprise institute. you're team paul in this one, i take it? what do you think -- why do you think this is a good fight for the republicans to have? i sense you do think it is. and why is paul the one that you're backing, that you feel speaks for the party the best. >> first let me say i do not accept rand paul's premise that eating bacon makes you gain weights, i think it's the carbs. in the foreign policy realm, what we need and in the national security realm, as far as nsa, spying and the great stuff that you and glenn were talking about earlier, what we need is a robust debate and there hasn't been that in the republican party for a long time. it's been close. in the democratic party today there's not a robust debate. >> what do you think i'm doing on air every night?
>> no, i'm glad you're doing it, your nancy pelosi -- >> who gets the spending part of it. >> i'm glad you have a republican party robust debate. i think at times some of my friends may go too far, but i think the chances are very slim that the republican party will go too far in the libertarian direction. that's why i'm hoping rand paul pulls harder on the end of that rope. >> i agree with tim that this is a really good debate. apropos of your conversation yesterday, can you look at this on a right on right violence. it is important we have this debate. it is interesting that chris christie who obviously, governor of new jersey, many of his constituents were affected by 9/11, it's interesting he's coming down more on the defense of the hawk side, whereas paul is more of a traditional libertarian, it's good we're having this conversation. >> that's where the fissure started, and i think that line has been clear, it's been clear
on votes from everything from arming the syrian rebels to discussions about iran, to a halt to surveillance, it seemed to move to spending today. you made the case before, here's this guy who's massively popular in a state that is overwhelmingly democratic, do you want to listen to that guy, or the guy who won in kentucky, which is never going to elect a democrat to begin with? >> yeah, i think that's right. and chris christie has had a customized record that's appealed very well in his state. relative to the baseline in new jersey, he's been a fiscal conservative, and pushed belt tightening in the state budget, at the same time when things like the medicaid expansion came up, he took the medicaid expansion dollars. it's a good fiscal deal for new jersey, he's saying, i'm not going do do this thing to appeal to national conservatives that gives up federal dollars being sent to my state. >> that's going to kill him, though. >> but it's been very popular in new jersey, he's probably going to get re-elected with somewhere
around 65% of the vote. i think the case he's going to make on the economic issues, unlike anyone else in the republican party, i've come up with a platform that's appealing to a broad coalition and can build a majority coalition nationally. >> it was interesting that rand paul said, i want to grow the party, we're shrinking in the northeast and so forth, he's saying that to a governor who's won in the northeast and in fact is looking like he's going to win an historic re-election. that didn't quite work. this fissure over spending really came out with the sandy aid, that's when christie first unloaded back in january when the house left without approving the aid. >> i have a shocking idea for you guys up there in new york and from new york. i'm originally from new york, but guess what, chris christie and the northeast earn portion of the country that's around new york city actually is parochial in itself.
you may think of it as being cosmopolitan. republicans are 911 republicans. chris christie will have a very hard road to hoe. >> that's why this fight is clarifying, the question of, it is a test case, it's a test case of what is the core of the base of the republican party, and josh, my suspicion is that rand paul is much closer to the base of the republican party than chris christie is. i want to talk about that in terms of defunding obama care, you wrote a defense of it today, ien watt to get your thoughts on that, a lot of people say it's a crazy idea, right after this break.
the big fight happening within the republican caulkess and senate is whether to threaten a government shutdown or debt default over insisting that obama care be defunded. a lot of people not even your usual suspects are saying, this is a maniacal idea. tim, you wrote a defense of it today in your column. >> sort of a qualifier. this is a contest, republicans say they dwhan want to repeal obama care. guys like mike lee and ted cruz and the folks at heritage action are saying, okay, if you guys believe in that, let's try to do it not hold some empty symbolic vote to do it, but do it. the continuing resolution to prevent a government shutdown on september 30th, use that and force a vote on repealing obama
care, where maybe middle ground is, you get to delay the individual mandate, the mandate that i have to buy what aetna is selling that's the idea. does the republican party stand for something? >> josh is shaking his head. >> this is not an actual point of leverage for them. the complaints have not come from squishy republicans who want to move off this fight and want to find ways to compromise with the president. what happens when you shut down the government, everybody in washington starts pointing fingers at each other about whose fault this is. this is going to blame the republicans because they've specifically said, we're going to shut down the government. >> the republicans lost eight seats after the shutdown with gingrich? >> after that they then lost seats in the '98 election and their status in amongsted the public completely collapsed. i mean --
>> and you think it was related? >> oh, yeah. >> i was there, tom coburn was there, richard burr was there, they're two of the people who say, don't do this. i mean, the memories of that have become sort of the republicans -- >> i like, by the way, the argument tim made is the best argument i've heard for it, if you actually believe in it, seriously, i remember making this argument on the left on iraq war continuing funding. if we actually believe in this thing, we shouldn't fund this thing. and the democratic leadership did what the republican leadership is going to do now, which is ignored it. what i think is interesting here, is the alliances that have now formed. john mccain hates lee, cruise and paul. you see the president cultivating john mccain more and more. he's talking in this interview about what a good relationship he has with the white house. he's going to send them to egypt as some kind of adversaries. >> and he's guaranteed them a return flight. >> but i think this is really
interesting, in that like we are now seeing this alliance being cultivated by the white house, because they now see a point of a kind of wedge point in the caucus. >> well, there's also a generational conflict that's going on here. you do have these kind of young guns rubio, paul cruz, lee on one side of this, and coburn, who is as conservative as them, has been around for a long time. he has memories of the government shutdown. >> does that sound right to you? >> i want all the liberals to stop listening at some point. if cruz, paul and lee are making coburn be the centrists obama wants to deal with. are they doing their job really well? >> what do you say? >> i think there are a couple things happening here, john mccain and lindsey graham really want more military spending. >> and they're still angry about the sequester. >> they thought the deal they were getting with the sequester in 2011 is that this thing is so
terrible, it won't become law, the military cuts won't happen. >> and surprise, surprise, rand paul won. thank you for joining me. >> josh gets all the attention. that's all in for this evening, the rachel has dow show starts now, with melissa harris-perry. >> thanks to joining us this hour. this is chris hughes, he was one of the founders of face back, going back to the dorm room days of harvard. in 2008 he ran the online part of barack obama's presidential campaign. he created the digital strategy that helped get president obama elected. last year he got married, he married sean eldridge in new york state. now, mr. hughes' new husband is running for congress as a democrat.