tv All In With Chris Hayes MSNBC December 1, 2016 12:00am-1:01am PST
tonight on "all in" -- >> i could be president of the united states and run my business 100%. >> the conflicts and the questions mount. >> so no theory i don't have to do anything. but i would like to do something. >> today the trump announcement that he would do something that so far doesn't amount to anything. >> then -- >> drain the swamp! >> how does trump square his goldman sachs pick. >> it's a global power structure that's responsible for the economic decisions that have robbed our working class. >> plus -- growing fears over the president-elect's response to the attack in ohio. beyond the headline, new details on the deal to keep carrier jobs in indiana. and as dems stick with pelosi, keith ellison is here with his plan to fight donald trump. when "all in" starts right now.
good evening from new york. i'm chris hayes. we are now just 51 days from donald trump becoming president of the united states and more and more people appear to be confronting the very real possibility that trump will use the full force and power of the us government to benefit his sprawling business interests and enrich himself and his family. today a largely unknown apparently pretty plucky little government office, the office of government ethics, which is charged with preventing conflicts of interest in the executive branch took to twitter to congratulate trump for addressing the issue. unleashing a very trumpian nine-tweet tweet storm that included, quote, real donald trump oge is delighted that you've decided to difbest your businesses. right decision, exclamation point. bravo, only way to resolve these conflicts of interest is to divest. good call. we told your counsel we'd sing your praises if you divested, we meant it. that was not hack. we made sure. it was also sadly what the kids
call trolling but the office of government ethics calling trump's bluff. this morning trump announced on twitter that he would hold a news conference along with his children to discuss the fact that i will be leaving my great business in total in order to fully focus on running the country in order to make america great again. trump wrote that he was not required to take this step under law but that he felt that leaving his business is, quote, visually important. hence, legal documents are being crafted which take me completely out of business operations. the presidency is a far more important task. this was greeted in some corners as actual substantive news generating headlines like this, trump leaving businesses to focus on running country. but in reality, trump's announcement means virtually nothing. trump did not provide further details but two trump staffers said today that trump is simply planning to follow through on his vow to hand his businesses over to his kids, a step he has long promised to take. >> i would put it in a blind
trust. i don't know if it's a blind trust if don e eric and ivanka run it. is that a blind trust? i would have my children run it and i would never be involved because i wouldn't care about anything but ow country. anything. >> it's not a blind trust. as the office of government ethics noted, the only way for trump to resolve these interests is to divest, to sell off his assets and put the revenue in a true blind trust that neither trump for crucially his family, his children, his loved ones that he presumably will be talking to every day knows what he owns. trump seems to think that despite taking that undeniably necessary step to protect the country, he's doing america a huge favor. >> according to the law, see i figured there's something where you put something in this massive trust and there's also -- nothing is written. in other words, in theory, i can be president of the united
states and run my business 100%, sign checks in my business. so in theory i don't have to do anything. but i would like to do something. i would like to try and formalize something because i don't care about my business. so i don't have to do anything, but i want to do something if i can. >> now, we do not know the full scope of trump's conflicts since his company is private and, of course, he never released his tax returns. but as president-elect trump has met with indian businessmen building a trump building and discussed wind farms that will wreck the views at one of his golf courses. and there's the trump international hotel in d.c., which is located just around the block from the white house in the taxpayer-owned old post office building just down the street from where trump will soon be living. already diplomats are flocking to the hotel in order to curry favor with trump which means he is already profiting from his role as soon-to-be public official. that's not the half of it.
trump leases the space from the federal government which means that he is about to become both the property's landlord and its tenant. trump will, again, if nothing changes, violate that lease on the first day he takes office since, for fairly obvious reasons, the lease states the following, no elected official of the government of the united states shall be admitted to any share or part of this lease or to any benefit that may arise therefrom. crucially even if trump hands the property over to his kids, it doesn't come close to solving the problem since he will continue to have a very vested interest in that hotel's success. joining me congressman michael burgess, republican of texas. good to have you, as always. >> chris, thanks for having me on. good to be with you. long time no see. and we had a big election a couple weeks ago and i haven't had a chance to chat with you. it's good to be with you. >> congressman, are you taking a victory lap? is that what you're doing? >> no, no.
in fact, i with some interest read your tweets about the election of 104 years ago. the hayes conflict. was that a relative of yours? >> i often wondered but it turns out the hayes was in the united states long before my hayes ancestors. >> you don't have a republican in your background. >> my grandfather, boy, he was all the way. let me ask you this. this doesn't strike me as particularly ideological, right? we're not talking about the proper way to structure american health care markets or top marginal tax rates. you would agree this is a real problem, right? >> look, we recognize and you and i have acknowledged in that past that trump was an unconventional candidate, now he's an unconventional president-elect. he's been very successful in his private life. i kind of know something like about that. i had to walk away from my medical practice. that's hard to do for someone my age. it's difficult. i can certainly sympathize that he may be having some difficulty with leaving that.
but this is a smart individual who has smart people around him. and i will trust that they will make the correct decisions. >> so here's my question, this is actually a great example, right? so you were a practicing physician, as i understand it. you had a very successful medical practice. >> very successful. >> you left that medical practice behind entirely, right? you didn't give it over to your kids, it's not something -- >> they weren't licensed to practice medicine in the state of texas, so that would have been hard. >> that would have been problematic. this isn't just an on paper, arm's length thing, you divested yourself from it. it's no longer under your purview. >> it wasn't required. certainly there are some physicians that maintained a practice when coming to congress. i debated it. but the type of practice i maintained was a 24/7 hands on, full time job. i knew this was a 24/7 full-time job. i had to make the decision. when i was running, people asked me what would i do.
i said if elected i would serve in congress and no longer be a doctor. >> i want to honestly and genuinely praise you for that. it could be a difficult thing. it could have been the case that you did that and two years later you get voted out and you start from scratch again. your own admirable and above and beyond actions in this case are a pretty good standard for the man who is going to be the most powerful man in the united states with the most difficult job in the world. >> we know some of his closest advisers are his children and i suspect his kids, don and ivanka are studying this, and goodness knows they've all got good lawyers. this is not something that's being handled lightly. i have not taukted to the president-elect about this or anything else, in fact, in the last three weeks. but i expect them to make the correct decision. he has said it over and over again. he's devoted to what he has chosen to do. it was a hard decision to make
and i know it was not easy for them but i trust them to make the right decision when the time comes. you pointed out, we have 51 days until he takes the oath. >> it strikes me that article one constitutional duty that you have and your colleagues have, is oversight of the executive. it's something that the republican congress has pursued zealously with this white house, something that the congress promised to pursue zealously if hillary clinton had been elected. in fact you're one of 52 members who signed a letter asking for the irs to investigate the clinton foundation. it doesn't seem to me that trust is necessarily the best way to fulfill that constitutional duty. isn't it your job as a member of congress to actually oversee that and make sure he makes good on it? >> you bet, you bet. he's got 51 days. and again, the president has -- this has been an unconventional campaign. he's an unconventional president-elect.
you know, i have been so impressed with how they've gone about the cabinet selection. >> yeah. >> i think he's listened to advisers. i think he's made studied decisions of the decisions that have been made. some people are frustrated because there's some other decisions that haven't been made. >> sure. >> but i think it's because he wants to have the information at hand before he actually enacts it. >> i'm going to call the standard which i think is the standard that i think should be followed, the burgess standard. we'll get you back on the show. >> and i'll try to tilt it to the hayes/tildon conflict again. >> professor, we've got a few things before us. one is there are some folks -- so in a strict statutory sense, it does seem to be the case that there is no statutory law that says the president has to divest. there are, however -- >> right. >> -- it has seemed some constitutional issues. how serious do you see those? >> i think they're very serious. the constitution specifies that
no official of the u.s. government certainly not the president can receive any economic benefit from any foreign government. it's very basic and very clear. just listening to congressman burgess, he sounds like a nice guy. >> yes. >> but he's talking like it's an issue of time management. donald trump said i won't worry about the details. i'll leave that to don jr. and eric and ivanka. big deal. that's just a facade. even if he looks away from the details and doesn't pore through them, every foreign government where he does business, and that's dozens of governments, knows perfectly well that if they grant a permit or grease a palm or do something for ivanka or for don jr. with respect to a hotel in istanbul where trump said he had a conflict of
interest. >> those were his words. >> they will be currying favor. they will be doing things that enhance the family wealth. and around the world, that's the way palms get greased. it's often to the prince and not the king that a special favor is done or that a payment is made. and i think it is estimating the american public to be stupid if they think that this facadis going to solve the constitutional problem. the office of government ethics is a nonpartisan body and although they chose an unconventional way to deliver the message, they were right. that is simply looking the other way while the family empire grows and receives financial benefits from not only our allies like the uk and scotland but people who are sometimes with us and sometimes against us
like turkey and maybe russia. looking the other way while they pile money into his coffers through his kids is not solving the constitutional problem at all. from the very moment this man takes the oath of office, he will be a walking, talking violation of the united states constitution. >> those are very strong words. >> i don't think that the electoral college really ought to give that kind of power to somebody who takes an oath he knows he can't keep. >> wow, professor tribe, strong words. the point about the prince and the king, i think is a really important one because obviously, i remember hearing stories about the business empire of hosni mubarak's son not because of mubarak's son's business acumen, they were the basic corruption of the state. laurence tribe, professor at harvard, thanks. >> thanks, chris. >> congressman, you've heard your colleague michael burgess
who says he trusts they will figure out the right thing to do. you've heard professor laurence tribe had says he'll be a walking essentially constitutional timebomb. what's your position? >> i agree with professor tribe. i don't think there's anything he can do to solve that problem other than completely divesting himself of all the interests, converting it into cash and putting that in a blind trust because otherwise he will know or his family members will know when someone is doing something that benefits his own financial situation. and that's a conflict of interest with his job as president. and contrary to what he said, by the way, it is not true that a president can't have a conflict of interest. there's certain statutes from which he's exempt, but there's others from which he is not exempt. he can't have a conflict of interest. and when mr. trump says that a president can't have a conflict of interest, is exempt from conflict of interest laws, it remipds me of president nixon
saying when a president does something, it's legal, no matter what it is. >> the remedy here would be impeachment because that's the way that the constitution would deal with violations of the law when undertaken by the president of the united states. short of that, though, right, what do democrats in the house minority, what can you do since there is no real cop on the beat? the office of government ethics, god bless them, tweeting is about the most vociferous we've seen anyone try to enforce this. >> a number of us have written a letter to the chairman of the judiciary committee asking for hearings on this. i don't know that they'll grant them, but you know, the fact of the matter is the house has wasted time and millions of dollars of public money on ridiculous investigations, repeat investigations, eight different investigations of benghazi and of hillary clinton's alleged misconduct.
when the president of the united states is walking into inherent conflicts of interest, inherent possibilities of violating the constitution, the emoluments clause and other things, then there ought to be hearings at least. >> it seems if nothing else, this hotel that's around the corner from the white house, in which he's going to be the landlord and the tenant in which he'll be possibly violating that lease on day one, that seems like a pretty distinct, specific and obvious thing that's got to be resolved. >> well, it is. but there are dozens of other things which will come to light and some which won't come to light that will have to be resolved. there's really no precedent for this. we certainly also ought to pass legislation requiring the president and for that matter candidates for president and other offices to reveal their taxes. >> that's a good point. >> because a lot of his conflicts we won't even know about because he hasn't revealed his taxes. >> maybe there can be some
bipartisan good government reforms on statutory fixes to this. i remain hopeful. congressman jerry nadler, thank you for your time. my interview with keith ellison on his plan to lead democrats in the era of trump. plus the following is a statement of fact. donald trump just picked one of the executive producers of the movie "suicide squad" to be america's next treasury secretary. not a sentence i thought i would ever read. meet the ex-goldman sachs banker.
so those who control the levers of power in washington and for the global special interests, they partner with these people that don't have your good in mind. it's a global power structure that is responsible for the economic decisions that have robbed our working class, stripped our country of its wealth and put that money into
the pockets of a handful of large corporations and political entities. >> that was a portion of donald trump's fairly powerful closing ad released just before the election in which he took aim at the political establishment, the global elite, notably hedge fund billionaire george soros. it was in that ad that trump criticized the global power structure. today he announced he wants a former goldman sachs banker to run the treasury department. steven mnuchin. his first hedge fund was named for the dunes outside his hamptons home. when mnuchin left goldman in 2002 he went to work with the aforementioned george soros, of course. he led a deal to buy the lender and changed the name to one west bank. he ran his bank that some called
a foreclosure machine. one west closed on more than 36,000 homeowners under mnuchin. they accused the bank of locating branches in white neighborhoods while avoiding minority communities. in a joint statement today bernie sanders and elizabeth warren said trump's choice for secretary of the treasury, steve mnuchin is just another wall street insider. that's not the type of change donald trump promised to bring to washington. that's hypocrisy at its worse. steve mnuchin is the second goldman sachs banker trump has tapped for a position. incoming white house strategist steve bannon, a man who bragged about his forum breitbart, was the first. there are reports that gary cohn who met tuesday with donald trump could head up the office of management budget, as politico noted goldman sachs is poised for a return to power in the trump white house.
joining me felix salmon. lloyd blankfein's face in that ad. >> and goldman sachs in particular. >> specifically goldman sachs and the fact if clinton had won because of sanders and warren, it would have been very hard for her to appoint any goldman people because they would have gone crazy. here we have two and possibly working on three. >> and then, of course, the lovely irony of bernie sanders and elizabeth warren who were campaigning so hard against all of trump's on the campaign trail and now they're upset he's breaking those promises. >> because everything feels like a bait and switch. when you run the ad that this very steve bannon inflected idea that it's the globalist plutocrats that are robbing the working class then you put mnuchin in as the head of treasury. >> he is the former president of one west bank, the chairman,
sorry of one west bank, he oversaw a whole bunch of foreclosures, there's wilbur ross who just got appointed as commerce secretary who is like even richer than both of them combined who is a corporate raider. they make money by firing people, not by hiring people. this is the classic example of capital -- making money at the expense of labor. >> that's exactly right. in some ways when you look at the 2012 campaign versus 2016, trump was able to get hillary clinton on the wrong side of the mitt romney, barack obama divide, right, where she weirdly played the role of mitt romney, she was the correct person who had all the dodgy deals and was connected to plutocrats and i'm the populist standing up for you. when you look at mnuchin and wilbur ross, these are the 1% plutocrats that we associate with the sort of backbone of the republican party at this level. >> right. this is the boss man. he is filling his cabinet with
exactly the davos man who he was running against on the campaign trail. it's so shameless to almost be admirable. >> here's something i found fascinating. this is goldman's stock price since the election of donald trump. i have sources of people i talk to on wall street for the years i did reporting on wall street and finance. the mood there is pretty ebullient. people were scared of trump, temperamentally scared. people are still temperamentally scared but hey, this is looking good. we're going to get big corporate tax cuts, we might get fiscal stimulus, we might get dodd/frank roll backs, deregulation. they're pretty happy. >> one thing they're going to get, one thing that trading banks love more than anything else, uncertainty and volatility. because when the market goes all over the place and no one knows what the president will do next, that's where they make all their money. all the big banks have seen their stock prices soar.
this has been wonderful for wall street. >> can i show you this graph, this is fannie mae shares reacting to steve mnuchin being nominated treasury secretary. just so we're clear, that's a 90-degree angle. that's people bidding up fannie mae shares. >> right now the government takes all of fannie and freddie profits for itself. it only owns 80% of them but there's this clever capital structure which means it get to keep all the profits for itself and the minority 20% of shareholders who have been left out in the cold by the obama administration are now hopeful that in this new capitalist frenzy -- >> oh, they're going to get their hands on that money! >> because fannie and freddie are hugely profitable just that the shareholders haven't seen any of that money ever since the financial crisis. >> felix salmon, thank you for joining us. appreciate it. >> thank you.
donald j. trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of muslims entering the united states until our country's representatives can figure out what the hell is going on. >> it was nearly a year ago that donald trump first called for a ban on all muslims coming into the u.s. in the wake of the attack in san bernardino, california. the declaration was one of the most chilling moments in candidate trump's campaign. today a little window into how
president trump might respond to another attack. in the wake of this week's attack at ohio state university when a so maly born student drove his car into a crowd and stabbed people with a knife, fortunately everyone survived although some are still hospitalized. the attacker appears to be self-radicalized inspired by isis judging by a post on facebook. early this morning trump tweeted isis is taking credit for the terrible stabbing attack at ohio state university by a somali refugee who should not have been in our country. now, the 18-year-old attacker who is a legal permanent resident of the united states came here in 2014 as a child along with his family and it's, of course, difficult to contemplate the extreme vetting regime that would be able to reliably predict a future child's actions. the importance and the weight of a president's response in the wake of an attack because when
hate incidents in first ten days after the election. incidents were limited to real world events. the count does not include instances of online harassment. it said it excluded news accounts that turned out to be hoaxes, of which there were a few. but it was not able to confirm the veracity of all submissions. the report also notes the bureau of justice statistics estimates that two-thirds of incidents go unreported by the police. it was the strongest the day after the election. those numbers have thankfully begun to drop off. 23 were anti-trump, 187 were anti-black, 280 were anti-immigrant. we've seen examples of some of those kinds of harassment around the country. "the washington post" reported on a motorist who yelled at a moroccan uber driver. he taped it and gave it to passenger who gave it to the "post."
>> [ bleep ] terrorist [ bleep ]. i don't care, bro, you're a loser. you're not even from here. trump is president. [ bleep ] so you can kiss your visa good-bye, scumbag. they'll deport you soon. don't worry, you [ bleep ] terrorist. >> there's a self-proclaimed trump voter who started yelling at a starbucks barista at the university of miami a couple weeks ago. >> you're trash. because i voted for trump. >> so what? >> trump. >> congratulations. >> you lost. give me my money back. what is your name? i want your name. i want your card. okay? you're garbage. >> joining me now, executive director of the arab american association of new york. let me ask you this, one of the things -- so we've been going through these accounts. in many cases they're hard to confirm. and there's also -- i want to be careful that we're not doing something where we're shining a
flashlight and we're saying, oh, there's this new thing happening. but there's been stuff happening all along, you know what i mean? i wonder how you feel about that? does it feel like from the folks you talk to, people in your community, is there something that happened after the election or does it not feel that different? >> oh, it absolutely does feel different. muz lips in particular or those perceived to be muslims like sikhs have experienced hate crimes in the days and weeks. so hate crimes are nothing new to us. it has exasperated in the past where people who may have went into a store in your neighborhood may have been normal. there are people more emboldened to come out with their hatred. even if they were holding it in before, the story that we're hearing every day, people being spit at coming to our adult education classes. >> really? >> people saying go back to your country. sometimes just using the word "trump" to antagonize you at a supermarket. >> i have say of all this, that's the most upsetting part of this. i've seen numerous occasions in
which the invocation of the name of the sitting president-elect of the united states is being deployed essentially as a kind of slur. >> oh, absolutely. >> and there have been numerous reports of this. and i think -- i'm curious what you think. it's probably reports like this are only capturing a tiny percentage of the kinds of incidents that are happening. >> i'm sure that there are refugees, immigrants, undocumented people who are already not reporting because they don't want to be on the radar of the federal government or law enforcement agencies. oftentimes people don't know that you can report harassment that somebody's spitting at you in the street is something you should tell law enforcement, that people should not be treating you that way or if you feel that you may be endangered that you should report these crimes. that 867 maybe triple that but we just don't know because we know that people don't always report those incidents. >> there's news today about a woman named katherine gorka who has been named to thomeland security transition team. she's someone that writes about islam for breitbart.
this is someone who is part of the kind of cottage industry of islamophobia. there's a connection between what's happening inside and what's happening outside it seems to me. >> i mean, the current whether it be transition or actual appointments of the trump administration are literally every muslim's worst nightmare being manifest into an administration. gorka has called for the sanctioning of muslim org nations. she believes conspiracy theories about the muslim brotherhood infiltrating the government. this is a woman who is extremely hateful. she's written for breitbart, but she's from a think tank. people take her word for it. she's being used as a pseudo expert on islam. she's dangerous and being appointed to transition the department of homeland security. the question is security from whom? >> thank you for your time.
thing 1 tonight, for the past six years north carolina has seen republican governance run rampant. in 2010 republicans could control both houses for the first time. not only does the shift give republicans the power to govern. it gives them an inherent advantage for years to come. the gop will be in charge of redrawing house and senate district. two years later pat mccrory cemented gop control becoming the first republican governor there in two decades. repercussions were swift. they withdrew lines to pack 49% of all north carolina's african-american voters in just three of the state's 13
congressional districts. it passed a bill dubbed by ari berman the country's worst vote suppression law. that was ruled unconstitutional this year by a federal court. but lawmakers were still able to cut voting access in other ways. guilford county went from having 16 voting sites open the first week of early voting to just 1 this year. mccrory steadily signed a republican agenda into law. enacting abortion restrictions and restricting lgbt protections, the transgender bathroom bill that was so offensive to major corporations including paypal, pepsi and deutsche bank that boycotted the state. it's been a gop free for all. but north carolina can be viewed as a blueprint for all of america as republicans will control the house and the senate. that's thing 2 in 60 seconds.
since north carolina republicans won the general assembly in 2010 and the governor's mansion they've witnessed a gop agenda on steroids and extreme gerrymandering but there are two major pieces of news out of the tar heel state today roy cooper the democratic challenger to governor pat mckroery extended his lead to more than 10s this thos votes with six counties reporting. that matters because mccrory needs the margin to be below 10,000 for a statewide recount. cooper's campaign manager declared today game over. so looks like a democratic governor is going to replace a republican in north carolina. meanwhile late last night a federal court ordered north carolina to hold a special legislative election in 2017 with redrawn district lines citing an unconstitutional racial gerrymander. the effect is that every state senate and house member will face re-election next year with new district lines. right now america's national
i was sitting home, i'm watching the news and i see 1400 people get fired from carrier. you're leaving indiana and we're going to protect the people of indiana. every single time you make an air conditioning unit you're going to have a major tax to pay when you sell it in the united states. our politicians have been working on this for years. they don't understand there have toy about incentives. there have to be consequences. >> he made a freaking example of carrier which nine months ago made plans to relocate jobs from indianapolis to mexico.
trump claimeded that by threatening steep tariffs on companies that export jobs he and he alone could convince carrier and its ilk to keep employing american workers. in this case he appears to have already succeeded. we are pleased to have reached a deal with president-elect trump and vp pence to keep close to 1,000 jobs in indy. details soon. tomorrow they'll travel to indianapolis for a kind of victory lap. it is a huge win for the thousands of workers that get to keep their jobs and a big public relations coup for the president-elect. what it is not is an actual plan to sustain job growth or manufacturing in the u.s. details about the deal are just beginning to trickle out. it seems that trump may have opted for the carrot approach he decried, incentives, instead of the stick. mike pence is still governor, we should note, reportedly plans to entice the company with economic incentives as part of the deal to stay. we don't know the cost of those. but every savvy ceo will now
threaten to ship jobs to mexico and demand a payment to stay. great economic policy. according to one official, the indiana economic development corporation carrier's parent company may have been concern about a stick, however, about losing billions of dollars in federal contracts under a trump administration. the former lieutenant governor told politico this deal is no different than other deals we put together at the iedc to retain jobs but the fact is that the difference is that the united states technologies depends on federal government for lots of business and we had a change in the election. the incoming trump pence administration has emphasized to us its commitment to support the business community and created an improved more competitive u.s. business climate. we don't know what those incentives are. we did get a look at that business community with an interview with trump's pick for treasury this morning.
>> we're going to cut corporate taxes, which will bring huge amounts of jobs back to the united states. >> what do you think you'll get to in that? >> we'll get to 15% and bring a lot of cash back into the u.s. >> that's the face of economic policy in the trump era. up next my interview with the man who wants to lead them.
republican party, at least rhetorically. treating him as a singular figure and an exceptional threat to american traditions. but three weeks into the transition, his cabinet picks have made it clear this administration is going be extremely republican. about as republican as it gets. trump may have run as a populist but he's largely an empty vessel. now his party controls two whole branchs of government they're filling up his agenda with items from the conservative wish list. the big question for democrats how to counter that republican juggernaut. i'm joined by keith ellison, candidate for chairman of the democratic national committee. congressman, what's the plan here? >> well, the plan is very simple. we have to really deliver for america's working classes. that means that we need to fight for higher wages. we've got to fight for real trade deals. and we got to make sure that we are invested in training and everything else that americans need.
>> but congressman, you can't deliver any of that, respectfully, in the minority of one house of congress. >> but we can offer an alternative vision, and the other thing we can do, chris, is we can make sure that the american people know that they've been given a bill of goods. they voted for certain things but what they're getting is a cabinet full of billionaire lobbyists, white supremacists and people who really are not the ones who are there who are going to deliver for the american people. there's a guy in the cabinet now in the treasury who was part and parcel of the whole housing financial collapse. we have another person, betsy devos who is all in favor of privatization of education. the people are not going to get what they've been promised in this election. >> this is a question to me. is it donald trump, i think, was able to win that primary, in many ways win the election because of his sort of ideological deviations from the republican party. do you think that will continue given the signs of what ryan says he's prepping in the house, who is around him or will you
get scott walkerism with a guy who likes to tweet a lot? >> well, i think we probably are going to get the worst of both, but you know, elizabeth warren said something really smart, which is personnel is policy. if you look at who he is selecting to be at treasury, you know, big hedge fund manager, involved in the financial collapse, the education thing very scary because we need education to be economically competitive. and also you know, medicare and medicaid now on the block with tom price, people need health care to be economically viable. and so what we're seeing is a set of appointments that will be the opposite of what people voted for when they thought he was going to be a working class champion. he might have played one on tv, but he's not a real one, and we know that because of the choices
he's already made. >> well so then how do you operationalize that? it seems to me in the position that you're in, there's going to be some high profile fights and in the senate they're probably going to pick fights on the nominees that they'll go after, in the house you guys are going to have fights about say medicare privatization, something like that. what's the broader message of the democratic party? what is the democratic party stand for in the era of trump? give me your elevator pitch. >> the democratic party is the party of working people across this country. we're not here for the special interests and the big money folks. we're here for the people who pour the cement, drive the buses, the people who take care of the patients, who teach the classes, the real working classes of america. and we're going to be fighting for them. so yes, democrats in the house and senate and every state legislature and every city council will be fighting on that front. >> what has -- >> but it's really about the grassroots, chris. >> what has to change institutionally about the
democratic party to make that a reality? because what happened i think we saw an election in which the candidate for the democratic party raised a huge amount of money, a lot of that was from wealthy donors. i don't think, you know, whether you morally fault her for that or not, you run for president, that's part of what you do. are there institutional ways you need to change the party to be a more credible party for working people? >> absolutely. we got the decentralize from washington to the grassroots. that's the real thing. you know, the elected officials, they're going to fight, but the real people got to be put in the game to fight are the people who work on the grassroots every day all across this country. and that means the democratic party needs to be moving resources towards the grassroots to empower them, communications, technology, but mostly heart and a fight and spirit for working people. >> what's the lesson for minnesota? i was looking at a map. the minnesota congressional. am i correct it's all democrats in your delegation in minnesota? >> no, no, we've got some republicans in there, too. >> but you guys have not seen the kind of sea change in that
state the way that some other states around you have seen. you've had democrats hold the line in minnesota. minnesota's a state that donald trump almost won sort of miraculously. what have you learned from minnesota? >> we learned that voter turnout strategies that operate 365 days a year really do work. that's how we made sure rick nolan won in the eighth district when had stewart mills threatening. that's how we hung on for tim walsh. in my own district we outperformed the democratic district by 60,000 votes which helped keep minnesota red. he lost by about 42,000 votes but we overperformed the democratic average in my district and that kept us a blue state. >> there's a story about be written about minnesota at this point. representative keith ellison, thank you for your time. tune in tomorrow night for my conversation with bernie sanders. you do not want to miss that. rachel maddow show starts right now. good evening.
>> good evening, chris. good evening, chris. thank you, my friend. >> you bet. >> thanks to you at home for joining us this hour. happy wednesday. usually they do it to promote a specific thing. usually it's for a cause. so take woodrow wilson. september 1919, world war i had just ended. he had met with european leaders whose countries had suffered such devastating losses in that unprecedented world war. european leaders agreed with him that there needed to be some kind of international body, some kind of international group to try to stop future conflicts before they turned into world wars again. but wilson had a problem. however much world leaders liked his idea about some new international body, at home he couldn't get anybody behind it. after world war i, congress wanted less to do with the rest of the world, not more. they were just superclear with him that even though he was the president and he had this league of nations idea, they were not going along with him on this issue. congress didn't like it. president wilson said, okay, then, fine, congress, you don't like it. i'll convince the people. i'll get them on my side. he set out on a tour in september of that year, 1919, he started a tour and his tour went 8,000 miles in 22 days. and that's one thing if you're like flying around in air force one, right? that can take you to all those