tv The Rachel Maddow Show MSNBC June 21, 2017 6:00pm-7:01pm PDT
thing, is even more catastrophic politically, ironically. i think the best thing for republicans is for it to die in the senate. >> right. one of the real heart breaks of this. one of the heartbreaks is this could have derailed this terrible bill. >> i don't think it's immensive if it did. thank you for joining me. that is all in for this evening. good evening, rachel. >> thanks, my friend. thanks to you at home for joining us this hour. there were apparently four hours of interviews all together, i will confess i have watched zero of those four hours. but i do keep watching the trailers every week to help myself decide if i might want to watch any of the interviews. turns out that that itself is newsworthy. because the new trailer for the newest hour of interviews, there's a problem in the trailer.
>> in hindsight, did you make a mistake in exiting crimea? there is a new law in russia that provides for mass surveillance. >> would you want to join isis if you saw that? >> can we just stop there? can we go back a couple of seconds and show that screen grab of what putin is showing oliver stone there on the camera? loop it, or put the screen back up. it's a strange moment. it ends up being an important moment. that was in the trailer. we went to find that moment in the tape from the overall, you know, hours of interview that showtime showed. we found that moment from the interview which they pulled this little bit from the trailer. what putin is doing here in this interview with oliver stone, it's kind of an unusual thing. even the physical blocking of it is strange. there's putin holding up a smartpho smartphone, and on that phone
he's showing oliver stone video, and what he's telling him is that this video that he's showing him on the phone is the russian military. he said it's russian mi-28 helicopter bombing and shooting at isis guys in syria. and this comes up in context, part of the section of oliver stone's interview with putin where he's basically praising russia and praising putin up and down for what good work russia is doing in the fight against isis. in that little bit from the trailer, you can hear oliver stone say, you wouldn't want to join isis if you saw that. right? so this is putin showing off to an appreciative interviewer, what his military is doing to kill guys in isis. oliver stone is essentially saying, wow, that's really impressive. boy, you guys are sure fighting real good against isis. and they stick with this tape for a long time. it's a big part of the interview. it makes it into the trailer and
everything. they go over this over and over again. they talk about it in detail, what's happening in the video, putin is narrating it. the weapons you can see there, what the guys on the ground are using in terms of their own weapons, the risk that the pilots are taking, in attacking these isis guys this way. turns out what vladimir putin is showing oliver stone on that phone is not actually the russian military attacking isis. turns out what he's showing oliver stone there is an old video from 2009 that's actually american military pilots fighting the taliban in afghanistan. and somebody apparently dubbed the audio from that tape, dubbed it over in russian, and fooled the kremlin into thinking this was brand-new tape of russian military helicopters attacking isis. it's not. it's the afghanistan, taliban
and american pilots. so they fooled the kremlin. or maybe they didn't fool the kremlin and putin thought it would be fun to fool this american guy who came all the way to moscow to interview him by showing him some fake footage. but this is a weird time in relation between our country and russia. even knowing how weird things are, though, it is still bizarre to see vladimir putin personally showing somebody the wrong tape. bragging about something the u.s. military did in a totally different country, trying to pass it off as if it's his military against isis. so showtime just posted that trailer for the oliver stone-vladimir putin interviews. posted that just in the last week. the kremlin is now very, very upset about the people who are pointing out what that video really is. pointing this out as putin's mistake. they're very upset about that. they're denying it up and down, but it's clearly a mistake. and that comes at a time that is
tense, not just in political terms between our two countries, but specifically in military terms, too. a couple of days ago, u.s. military aircraft, big spy plane, we have an animation of this thing, i forgot, u.s. military spy plane, the larger plane there, with more than two dozen u.s. crew onboard, it was intercepted by a russian fighter jet. now, u.s. and russian aircraft intercept each other and fly around each other and try to scare each other in international air space all the time. it apparently happens frequently. it apparently now happens with the chinese air force as well. but this thing that happened on monday, it was a little bit beyond the pale, because this russian fighter jet flew up to the much larger american spy plane, flew up at a high rate of speed and apparently it closed to within five feet of the american plane. five feet. do you want to know how far five feet is? i measured. it's this far, between these two. five feet. that's how close it got.
i got a tape measure. that's my wing span. the u.s. military called that five-foot approach from the russian fighter jet, quote, unsafe and unprofessional. they actually said the russian pilot did not appear to be in complete control of his fighter jet when he closed to within that far of that larger american plane. that happened on monday. that itself was a day after the u.s. military shot down a syrian fighter jet and killed a syrian pilot. that was the first time in more than a decade that the u.s. military has shot down a manned aircraft from another country's military. russia, of course, is one of syria's closest allies. russia responded to the u.s. shooting down that syrian fighter jet by saying basically that they would shoot down american aircraft over specific parts of syria from here on out. the u.s. military reportedly repositioned some aircraft in response to the russians. then today, on top of all that, there was this.
and this is not an animation. this is the real footage apparently. this is footage apparently taken from inside a russian airplane, a plane in which the russian defense minister was reportedly traveling. this happened also -- it happened today over the baltic sea. the aircraft that you see off the wing of the plane there, very nearby, is a nato f-16. it's apparently flown by a polish pilot. that's a polish f-16. flying a nato mission. as you can see, that f-16 is very close to the russian defense minister's plane. but then look at this. another plane appears, even closer. similar size, but a different shape to the f-16 out there. that's a russian su-27 fighter. that's the same kind of russian fighter that got to within five feet of that big american surveillance plane just a couple of days ago, also over the baltic sea. so this is this remarkable scene. you can see shot from the window of the larger russian aircraft.
the russian fighter jet pulls up in that tiny space between the f-16 and wing tip of this larger russian plane. the russian jet squeezes in between the two of them. the reason the russian fighter jet, you can see it at one point in this tape tilting its wings, that's apparently to show the f-16 that it is armed with air-to-air missiles. see that tilt right there? that's him showing off his missiles underneath his left wing. that su-27 is apparently armed with the kind of missiles that fighter jets use to shoot down other fighter jets. that's what that showing off is. the nato f-16 hangs in there for a few more seconds and ultimately moves away. so this is not an abstract thing. right? relations between russia and the west, relations between russia and us, it's not just a conceptual thing. relations are obviously a little
fraught right now. the chest pounding and physical shows of force that we're getting from russia and vladimir putin just over the past few days, they range from, frankly, ridiculous, and funny, to legitimately threatening and scary. while all that stuff gets acted out in some new way every day now, today in washington there was a serious effort to try to nail down the exact scope of how russia attacked our presidential election last year. and this wasn't so much about the attack on the democratic party's servers and on the clinton campaign staff. we've heard a lot about those attacks. today on capitol hill, it was a lot more detailed than we've had before about how the russian government hacked into and tried to mess with election systems. all over our country last year. and even if you've been paying close attention to that part of that story, to what we know about that part of the russian attack, you would be forgiven for not having a terribly clear sense of how big that attack
was, where russia attacked, what specifically they attacked and how effective those attacks were. our government previously announced that u.s. election systems in the state of arizona and state of illinois had been hacked by the russians. last week "bloomberg news" had a report citing three people with direct knowledge of the u.s. investigation into the matter. they had a report that said the russian attack hadn't just been about against a couple of states, it actually had been against 39 states. russian cyber attacks much wider than previously known. then today there was this testimony in congress, and homeland security officials, testimony in congress today, they had a whole new number. and a whole new description of how big that attack was, and what the russians actually went after. they said today that it's 21 states that the russians attacked. okay. okay then, sure.
>> are we prepared today to say publicly how many states were targeted? >> as of right now, we have 21 states -- election related systems in 21 states that were targeted. >> internet related networks in 21 states were potentially targeted by russian government cyber actors. >> okay. that was the word from homeland security officials today, 21 states. bloomberg a few days ago citing three sources it was 39 states. the public statement from the government already about the two states that were named states, arizona and illinois. but in terms of figuring this out, and figuring out how big this attack was, what they were going after, i mean, if it was more than those two states that they named, whether it was 21 states, or it was 39 states or some other number of states, i think the important thing here is we don't actually know where they attacked. even if they're telling us
definitively it was 21 states, they haven't given us a list of those states. we don't know where these attacks happened. we don't know what type of attacks they were. even in these 21 states, we don't know if that meant that 21 state election systems were attacked, or maybe it was individual cities or counties, or even precincts within those states. we don't know. that's hard to tell. and that is in part because our election system is decentralized. yes, every four years in november, we all as americans go vote for who we want as the new american president. but technically, we don't participate in one big national election. when we all vote for president every four years, we participate technically in about 9,000 different simultaneous elections that happen in about 9,000 different jurisdictions all around the country. and all of those different jurisdictions, all 9,000 of them, they more or less have control about exactly how their election is going to be run. that's sort of a blessing for us as kaa country and a curse.
we try to figure out how ambitious and damaging their attacks were on our election system, part of the reason it's hard to get a handle on it is because there's no one person in charge of defending our whole election system. no one person in charge of defending and monitoring the safety of all the zillions of little local election systems we've got all over the country. it makes it hard to figure out. that's kind of a down side of the decentralation. who's in charge of keeping this safe? lots and lots and lots of different people all around the country. that said, there's also a benefit of us having this decentralized system, for a determined adversary who is trying to affect the technical side of our election infrastructure. no one attack will do it. you can't just hit one spot. you've got to hit a whole bunch of different places. maybe ones that you've chosen quite strategically. take, for example, dallas,
texas. texas, of course, famously is a very red state. but dallas county is a very blue county. they voted in the november election 2-1 for clinton over trump. we now know in retrospect that hillary clinton wasn't going to win texas. she ended up losing the state overall by about, i think it was nine points. but there's been discussion during the presidential campaign that hillary clinton might have a shot in texas. some people thought it was a pipe dream, or clinton looking cocky. but there was a case to be made for it. she really did campaign in texas. and the democratic party didn't really work hard there. and they spent money there. and, you know, if they weren't just bluffing, if they ever really were going to have a shot at winning texas, it would come because they really ran up the vote totals as big as they could in the blue counties in the state. in the places like, you know, dallas county.
the two most concentrated places in that state for democratic votes was houston county and dallas county. there were hundreds of thousands of democratic votes cast in just those two counties. in october, before the election, department of homeland security sent out an alert to local election officials around the country telling them that they, the homeland security department, had identified a concerted effort to hack into election systems around the country. and homeland security distributed a list of about 600 suspicious ip addresses, specific computer addresses, basically, from which these attacks were being launched. and they told election officials all over the country that they should scan their systems locally to see if there was any evidence of these ip addresses, if there had been any attempts of hacking from these specific ip addresses and they sent them all out in a big long list, 600 of them. last week dallas's election
administ administer said they followed that. to see if they had been hit by any of those ip addresses on that list of 600 sent out by homeland security, they got 17 hits. 17 ip addresses made an effort to attack the dallas county voter roles. they worked with federal authorities. they told the county at least 17 of those addresses in which hacking attempts had been made, at least some of those 17 definitively were computers in russia. now, what the hack attempt was there was not on computer systems that were used to tabulate the vote, but if you think about it, that doesn't necessarily matter. right? that specific doesn't matter, right? these particular hacking attempts in dallas county, they
were apparently going after the voter file, the data base of registered voters. in dallas county, that's over 1 million people, your name, your date of birth, the address at which you're registered to vote. they check that against the data base when you show up to vote. you wouldn't have to mess with the counting of the vote in dallas county, or texas as a state, if you could screw up the voter file in the one or two counties where there was really crucial vote that was going to be determinative of how that state ultimately went in the presidential election. for example, if you wanted to hurt democrats' chances in the election, you would target one of those two counties where most of texas' democrats would vote. if stuff was messed up in those counties, that might affect how texas went. even if you didn't mess with the county. "dallas morning news" reported on this last week, john wily price saying it wasn't just one
attack, it was multiple attempts. he told the "dallas morning news," quote, the fact that there were that many attempts means they expected to disrupt, if you disrupt the voter file, when people are trying to validate voter information at the polls, you would get mass confusion. the "dallas morning news" reported on these attacks a few days ago, they contacted a couple of republican-leaning counties just outside dallas county to see if they went through the same thing. they contacted the election administrators in collin county and ter rent county right next door to dallas county. election administrators in those counties, as far as they could tell, they didn't get attacked. tarrant county, that votes republican, the election administrator there said he, too, scanned his county system to see if any of those 600 ip addresses had tried to mount any attacks, or try to attack their system. said he didn't get a single match. why did these russian hackers only attack the democratic county and not the republican
counties next door? is that the kind of thing that happened nationwide? is there a pattern of that kind of thing? is it because dallas is a famous county that you might have heard of if you only speak russian? we don't know. that was just a spot check. that was spot check reporting from the "dallas morning news" about what happened in their locality. and that's kind of what we've got so far. "the wall street journal" has also been trying to report out the scope and the shape of the russian attack to see whether this russian attack last year could conceivably have affected our ability to vote, in addition to the stuff that we understand better now, like the russian propaganda, and russian leaked documents and the rest of it. could it have affected the way we voted technically? the journal said they started surveying election officials in nearly every state in the country to start asking these questions. they now started to report out their findings, and here's what they report out of north carolina. quote, the north carolina state board of elections
investigations unit is led by a former fbi agent. they're investigating the reportive attempts to compromise vr systems incorporated, a florida firm whose electronic poll book software was used on election day in 21 of carolina's counties. it was checking voters in, not with counting their votes. quote, but on election day last year, that system failed in durham county, north carolina. and durham county, north carolina, holds the state's most reliably democratic voters. that forced the county to issue ballots by hand, meaning longer lines and delays, factors that can often depress turnout. again, this was not an attack on the way you count the votes, but it may have been an attack on the most democratic county in the state, where hillary clinton was going to get her biggest margins on election night in north carolina. and for whatever reason, things did go wrong in that county on election night when it came to their poll book software.
>> welcome to the election hq on election night. >> we'll be here all night watching the big races on air. >> the big news at this hour, eight durham precincts extending voting hours, some 15 minutes, some a full hour to 8:30. >> several precincts had problems with the check-in system. they went to paper books. >> because of the decentralized nature of our american election system, it is hard to get a nationwide sense of exactly which parts of our election system got hacked, got attacked in this russian effort last year, and how successful those attacks were. the anecdotal information we're starting to pull together so far doesn't give us any systematic look of how the russians targeted their attacks. maybe they were just lucky to target that one democratic county in texas and not the republican counties next door, we don't know. maybe the failing of the poll book software in durham, north
carolina, that poll book software made by a florida company, reportedly attacked by the russians last year, maybe the russians just got lucky, that where it failed was in the most democratic county in north carolina. we don't know. those are little spot checks. but until we get a systematic comprehensive assessment of what happened with those attacks, how well targeted those attacks were to achieve what our government said were the russians' intentions, we will not know if they just got lucky here and there, or if it really was just a scatter shot attack and they're just seeing what they could get and trying everything. it does appear now, though, that the investigators who were trying to figure this stuff out for our country are zeroing in on these questions on whether or not anybody may have helped the russians target their attacks. we'll be speaking with a top democrat on the house intelligence committee in a few moments. the guy who was in charge of digital, the guy in charge of data analytics and voter targeting for the trump campaign
is going to be asked to appear before the house intelligence committee on just these questions. and just in the last couple of days, we have seen this bizarre story of what appears to be the largest leak of voter information ever in the history of this country, or any other country. a file including detailed information on more than half the people in our country. 198 million voter files. including, like, everything about you, your first name, last name, birth date, address, phone number, any other phone number you use, the party you're registered in, your political preferences on abortion to gun rights to exxon mobil, the stem cell research, detailed personally specific information on 198 million americans. and it was just found online on an unsecured server that required no password to access it or anything. it was just sitting there, for anybody to take it. sitting there on a web address. if you knew the web address, you could just go get it. my god, if you ever wanted to
help somebody target american voters in the most specific way possible, it wouldn't be a terrible strategy to just quietly post that data online for 200 million americans. just tell somebody where they could find it online, come collect it, it's there. that massive trove of personal data about basically all the registered voters in the country, republicans, democrats, independents, everybody, that data was apparently left online, unsecured by a subcontractor that worked at the republican national committee in last year's election. most of the data appears from the main analytics contractor who worked at the republican party last year. this is an old data, stuff that was updated apparently right up until the time that trump was inaugurated. the guy who was in charge of data trust, right up until the time trump got inaugurated, is a guy named johnny decityfano. now he's the director of personnel in the trump administration, working in the white house.
we have learned today and over the last few days about the scope of the russian attack on our election last year. it's spooky. but it's also very scatter shot understanding. and that's unsettling, if you want to have confidence that our country is getting a handle on this thing. top democrat on the intelligence committee joins us next to talk about whether in fact we are getting a handle on this thing. the peace of mind e and the security just like the marines did. at one point, i did change to a different company with car insurance, and i was not happy with the customer service. we have switched back over and we feel like we're back home now. the process through usaa is so effortless, that you feel like you're a part of the family. i love that i can pass the membership to my children, and that they can be protected. we're the williams family, and we're usaa members for life. call usaa today to talk about your insurance needs.
a mihappy birthday, sweetie! oh, millies. trick or treat! we're so glad to have you here. ♪ what if we treated great female scientists like they were stars? ♪ yasss queen! what if millie dresselhaus, the first woman to win the national medal of science in engineering, were as famous as any celebrity? [millie dresselhaus was seen having lunch today...] ♪
that is a fact, plain and simple. >> why do you think that president trump will not state that russia meddled in our elections? >> you would have to ask him, sir. >> you say the voter registration data bases are vulnerable to exfiltration. if they're vulnerable to exfiltration, are they also vunerable to the uncertainty whether someone was eligible to vote? >> yes, and yes. to both your questions. >> former homeland security secretary jeh johnson testified today in congress. now the man asking him that last question, congressman adam schiff on the intelligence committee. appreciate your time being here tonight, sir. thanks for being here. >> thanks, rachel. >> does our government have clarity on how widespread the attack was on our election systems last year, on things like voting roles that you were
asking about there? >> i think to this day we continue to learn more about the russian hacking, about the extent of it, about what they were probing, not only in terms of state, but also local elections infrastructure. but also other techniques that the russians may have been experimenting with, or probing to prepare, if not that battlefield, but a future battlefield for ways that they could so discord, create uncertainty, call it a question of the results of the elections. what we're really trying to do is fully understand that picture, but at the same time understand how the russians used paid social media trolls, whether they used data analytics, whether they had help of u.s. persons or entities in that to marry voter information, along with social media information, along with information about particular states or precincts or voter preferences. was there an effort by the russians to put that together in a way to influence outcome. so that is very much one of the
issues that we continue to look at. and investigate. and ultimately, need to get to the bottom of. >> i've been trying to answer this question just for myself in terms of being able to conceptualize exactly what happened last year and get a handle on what they were aiming at, how ambitious they were, how effective it was, what they might come back with in the future. i feel like i've been able to follow it in a spot check sort of way, as journalistic papers around the country, wall street journal or other regional papers figure out what happened in their states locally. is anybody in charge of investigating that for the whole country? are we going to have a nationwide audit that we eventually get the results of in terms of what the russians did attack, what they didn't attack, whether there was any rhyme or reason to it, or whether it was a scatter shot thing? >> well, you know, ideally, if we're successful in taking these investigations to their
conclusion, we will make a report covering these attacks on the infrastructure, what did they do, what did they accomplish. it may be that the russians, in addition to trying to so discord, we're also in the same way they might probe our hydroelectric, our power grids, or other critical infrastructure, essentially looking to see what they could accomplish if they decided to escalate to the next level. so it may be as much about the last election as it is about the next election. so we hopefully will be providing a report to the public on just these things. it is in a predominantly a responsibility, though, of the department of homeland security to help our states with best practices, to secure their elections infrastructure, to inform them in a timely way of threats to that infrastructure. and they probably have the primary agency responsibility in this area. >> and on the point that you raised a moment ago about whether or not the russians were
targeting different parts of our election infrastructure in a strategically cogent way, to further what we believe were their aims overall in the election, to help trump and hurt clinton. it's been reported in the last few days that your committee wants to talk to a man named brad parskou, in charge of digital for the trump campaign, in charge of the voting target efforts. is this what you want to talk to him about? >> rachel, i can't confirm particular witnesses, but i can certainly tell you that we are very interested in finding out whether there was an effort to make use of data analytics, whether there was russian funding or support for that, or russian assistance in gathering data that could be used by the campaign or any associates of the campaign, so that is one of the issues that we are exploring. we want to see whether there was an effort to, by manipulation,
for example, by the use of bots, push negative stories about hillary clinton, or positive stories about donald trump to the top of people's social media feed in a way that would help influence outcomes. so this is very much one of the issues that we need to wrestle with. you know, i will say this, too, though, that in the broader scheme of things, it is going to be vital obviously to protect the elections' infrastructure. it has the inherent safeguard as you said of decentralization. but i think the greater defense is informing the american public about what the russians did, what they might do the next time, and somehow inoculating ourselv ourselves, whether it hurts or helps one party or the other, we all condemn it. that ultimately is the best defense. >> we condemn it and take steps to stop it from happening. >> absolutely. >> thank you, sir. appreciate it. >> thank you, rachel. busy night. stay with us. tech: when you schedule with safelite autoglass,
you get time for more life. this family wanted to keep the game going. son: hey mom, one more game? tech: with safelite, you get a text when we're on our way. you can see exactly when we'll arrive. mom: sure. bring it! tech: i'm micah with safelite. mom: thanks for coming, it's right over here. tech: giving you a few more minutes for what matters most. take care! family: bye! kids singing: safelite® repair, safelite® replace. you know new pantene.r tangles the minute you wash it? the first shampoo with active pro-v nutrient blends fueling hair 100% stronger that's instantly smoother and tangle free. because strong is beautiful.
[ intense music playing ] ] it's here, but it's going by fast. the opportunity of the year is back: the mercedes-benz summer event. get to your dealer today for incredible once-a-season offers, and start firing up those grilles. lease the e300 for $569 a month at your local mercedes-benz dealer. mercedes-benz. the best or nothing.
today protesters showed up at republican senator susan collins' office in portland, maine. they're her constituents. they said they were there to protest the republican effort to kill the affordable care act, that senate republicans are so far keeping secret, but expecting it to start going very fast as of tomorrow. you see the sign that the protesters are holding there. what are they hiding? folks also showed up at senator collins' offices in augusta,
maine, today, similar message. no score, no hearings, no bill. no score means no score from the congressional budget office saying how much the republican plan will cost in terms of money, how many millions, or tens of millions of people will lose health insurance because of it. at her bangor, maine, office, senator collins' constituents were there, too, today, protesting outside. eventually they were let in a few at a time. but it's not just senator collins. these are demonstrators from ohio who drove halfway across the country, from ohio, to washington, to show up at their senator's office in d.c., rob portman's d.c. office. they say he won't meet with them back home. they staged a sit-in in his d.c. office today because they want the process brought out into the light. there's increasing amount of activism on this every day now. we have reason to believe this may be drug out into the light as of tomorrow morning. what's likely to happen then is
...smells fine, but your passengers smell this bell dinging new febreze car with odorclear technology cleans away odors... ...for up to 30 days smells nice... breathe happy, with new febreze. i needed something more to help control my type 2 diabetes. my a1c wasn't were it needed to be. so i liked when my doctor told me that i may reach my blood sugar and a1c goals by activating what's within me with once-weekly trulicity. trulicity is not insulin. it helps activate my body to do what it's suppose to do, release its own insulin. i take it once a week, and it works 24/7. it comes in an easy-to-use pen and i may even lose a little weight. trulicity is a once-weekly injectable prescription medicine to improve blood sugar in adults with type 2 diabetes when used with diet and exercise. trulicity is not insulin. it should not be the first medicine to treat diabetes,
or for people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. do not take trulicity if you or a family member has had medullary thyroid cancer, if you've had multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if you are allergic to trulicity. stop trulicity and call your doctor right away if you have a lump or swelling in your neck, severe pain in your stomach, or symptoms such as itching, rash, or trouble breathing. serious side effects may include pancreatitis, which can be fatal. taking trulicity with a sulfonylurea or insulin, increases your risk for low blood sugar. common side effects include nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, decreased appetite and indigestion. some side effects can lead to dehydration, which may make existing kidney problems worse. once-weekly trulicity may help me reach my blood sugar goals. with trulicity, i click to activate what's within me. if you want help improving your a1c and blood sugar, activate your within. ask your doctor about once-weekly trulicity.
if you've been calling, senator lee has been very sorry you have not been able to get through. >> i'm senator mike lee. if any of you ever called into my offices, chances are you've spoken to one of these hard working interns in my office answering phones, and fielding questions. we've gotten calls in the last few days from people throughout
utah and across america expressing concerns in one way or another about the health care bill being considered by the senate. i've had a lot of people ask me specifically when the health care bill is going to be released to the public, why it isn't public. the short answer to the question is, i haven't seen it yet either. even though i've been a member of this working group among senate republicans, assigned to help narrow some of the focus of this, i haven't seen the bill. >> don't ask me what's in it. i have no idea. senator mike lee of utah is in fact one of the republicans who was publicly assigned to write the bill. to write the senate republican bill to repeal the affordable care act. he said even he has no idea what is in it. who's writing it then? we don't know. but apparently it's going to be done and public by 9:30 tomorrow morning. at least we'll all know what it says. if not, who came up with it. so far one of the only details
about it that has leaked in advance is that it contains very, very, very large cuts to medicaid. >> i'm not going to cut social security like every other republican. and i'm not going to cut medicare or medicaid. >> i'm not going to cut medicaid. the one thing we're told to expect for sure tomorrow morning is it's definitely going to cut medicaid. joining us now is president of planned parenthood. cecile, nice to see you. >> nice to see you, rachel. >> obviously your organization has a huge stake in what's going to happen, it will affect a sixth of the u.s. economy. what's your expectation here? >> we have to rely on rumors and leaks like everybody else. but i think this is going to be a bill that is going to mirror the house bill, which is incredibly unpopular. it would end health care for millions of americans. i think it will include language to end access to planned parenthood. and it's going to cut millions
of folks on medicaid now. i think the president thought the last bill was mean, this is going to be even meaner. >> the planned parenthood issue has been named by at least one republican senator, as being a real deal breaker for her. >> yes. >> senator collins. >> that's correct. >> she said she's not going to vote for a bill if it cuts off access to planned parenthood. are there any other senators you're having constructive conversations with, any other republicans who are basically with you on that? >> absolutely. senator collins has been great, a strong supporter of planned parenthood. senator murkowski of alaska as well, expressing her concerns over the bill. i think partly as well, as you noticed, the folks who are behind closed doors making this bill, and writing it, there are no women in it at all. but if you look at what happened in the house, this is a bill that would be devastating for women in america in every single state, but certainly including
their states. >> in the working group that was supposedly writing this thing, that the republican men's chorus, apparently the men in that group say they don't know what's in it, and they haven't been writing it either. we have absolutely no wrid where it comes from. >> don't you think it's because they know how bad it is and nobody wants to take responsibility? we haven't had a bill like this wi with -- it's going to be so bad, that's why they're trying to jam it through and everybody's claiming they have no responsibility. it's really incredible. >> ultimately they're going to have to take a vote. they're likely on this schedule to be making a vote a week from tomorrow. >> that's the plan. rachel, too, no public hearings, no public input. you saw the folks -- look, thousands and thousands of people are calling congress, as you know. they're shutting down the switchboard day after day because people are so alarmed, trying to get to town hall meetings. senators aren't even holding them. there has to be public input on
a bill that would have this much impact on people. >> they know how unpopular bill this is. having it made material in front of their eyes by people showing up at their offices, standing outside their district offices. do you think it will move votes? >> i absolutely think it will. they're counting the calls that come in. they're paying to what's happening back home. republicans are saying, this is incredibly unpopular. that is the message they're giving to mitch mcconnell. they're going to jam it through without any public input because they know how unpopular it is. >> do you think that is what's driving not just the urgency, but the secrecy around it, but the specifics of the calendar? we're talking about them taking a vote a week from tomorrow. what happens the day after a week from tomorrow is a recess where all these members of congress and senators have to go home and face their constituents. do you think the calendar on this is being driven specifically to have it done,
and the vote over by the time all these senators have to face their constituents again? >> that's right. that's what they've continued to try to do. remember, rachel, the president and congress pledged january 27th, this bill is going to be passed on the president's desk and signed. we're now nearly five, six months later. it hasn't been. that's because it's incredibly unpopular. these senators, many of them are up for reelection. every single member of congress is up for reelection. they're paying attention to what people are saying back home. that's where change is going to happen. it's not going to happen in washington, it's going to happen in arizona and nevada and ohio and the places where people are turning out in numbers i've never seen before. >> cecile richards, president of planned parenthood, i appreciate you being here. stay in touch with us over the next few days as this thing drops. i appreciate it. >> we're watching. quick correction. when i showed that video of utah senator mike lee, it said on the screen he is a democrat. i'm near sighted enough that i did not notice that in realtime.
but i'm told it said democrat on the screen. senator mike lee is many things. he is definitely, definitely, definitely not a democrat. senator lee, i apologize wholeheartedly, i meant nothing by it. and i couldn't even really see it. we'll be right back. really see it tell your doctor about your medicines, and ask if your heart is healthy enough for sex. do not take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain, or adempas® for pulmonary hypertension, as this may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. do not drink alcohol in excess. to avoid long-term injury, get medical help right away for an erection lasting more than four hours. if you have a sudden decrease or loss of hearing or vision, or an allergic reaction, stop taking cialis and get medical help right away. ask your doctor about cialis. and get medical help right away. it's not just a car, (work sfx) it's your daily retreat. the es and es hybrid. lease the 2017 es 350 for $329 a month for 36 months. experience amazing at your lexus dealer.
i get multiple offers to compare side by side. and the best part is... the banks come crawling to me. everything you need to get a better mortgage. clothing optional. lendingtree, when banks compete, you win. okay! ...awkward. he's happy.t's with him? your family's finally eating vegetables thanks to our birds eye voila skillet meals. and they only take 15 minutes to make. ahh! birds eye voila so veggie good
hey you've gotta see this. cno.n. alright, see you down there. mmm, fine. okay, what do we got? okay, watch this. do the thing we talked about. what do we say? it's going to be great. watch. remember what we were just saying? go irish! see that? yes! i'm gonna just go back to doing what i was doing. find your awesome with the xfinity x1 voice remote. we have an answer. we have an answer. we have an answer. i told you we would eventually get an answer on this, and we have now got it. all right. since last week, we have been
asking what on earth is vice president mike pence doing in this picture? this single picture which he tweeted has been the only glimpse of a fund-raiser that he held in indiana on friday, a fund-raiser for his brand-new pac. now, it's strange enough for a sitting vice president to have a political action committee of his own. that is very unusual. but what does mike pence intend to do with the money his pac has, the money that he's now raising for his pac? the reason i've been asking is in part because of the timing. because on thursday last week, that's when mike pence announced that he had hired a top-shelf, a-list, private lawyer to personally represent him in the trump/russia investigation. then the very next day on friday, there he was in indiana very quietly holding a top-dollar fund-raiser not for the republican party or for any active candidates in the elections, but for his new pac with tickets going for $1,000 to
$5,000 a plate. what's that money for? is the vice president conceivably going around the country quietly raising money to pay for his own legal bills? that's an expensive lawyer he just hired. nobody from the vice president's pac would tell us. the vice president's own spokesperson would not say one way or the other. all we had was this one picture and a whole bunch of our unreturned e-mails. today we tried again. at 1:18 p.m. eastern time, we wrote to mike pence's personal lawyer, explaining that we really would like an answer to this question. then at 3:45 p.m., a couple hours later, "the wall street journal" published an answer to our question. no, mike pence will not be paying his legal bills with money from his pac. that sort of seemed to be the plan as of last week, but it is apparently officially not the plan anymore. so now we've got an answer. it still leaves the question of how mike pence, who is not mr. money bags, how he is going to pay for the powerhouse new
lawyer he just hired, who's got experience incidentally in watergate and iran-contra. that lawyer, richard cullen, told us very politely today that he doesn't like getting into the details about how his clients are going to pay his firm. nobody else will say. we also heard from an expert in these matters, craig holman, a public citizen. he says the vice president has a couple of clear choices for getting the money he's going to need to pay for his expensive lawyer. he could start a legal defense fund the way bill clinton did, or he could ask permission from the fec to use trump/pence campaign money. it may be worth noting here that the president not only funded much of his campaign last year, though not to the extent he promised, he also re-upped the campaign on inauguration day. donald j. trump for president inc. is open for business. the president's re-election campaign already exists, and that campaign did announce a new fund-raiser this afternoon at the president's own trump hotel in d.c.
all day, and all night. now packed into a pill so small, we call it mini. new clearminis from nexium 24hr. see heartburn differently. this was nice to see tonight. it was kind of heartbreaking but still nice to see. that is special agent crystal griner of the u.s. capitol police. she threw out the first pitch at tonight's congressional women's softball game despite having to do so from that wheelchair that
she is in. she's in the wheelchair because she's recovering from a gunshot wound she sustained during last week's shooting that targeted republican members of congress at their last practice in advance of the annual congressional baseball game. i should also note some other good news today after that shooting. the house majority whip, number 3 republican in the house, steve scalise, very seriously injured in that shooting. but today the hospital that's been treating him upgraded his condition from serious to fair, which is an improvement. med star washington hospital where congressman scalise is recuperating, they announce today that he continues to make good progress, which of course is heartening to hear. that does it for us tonight. we will see you again tomorrow. it's time for the last word with lawrence o'donnell. >> wonderful to see the video of officer griner throwing out that first pitch and in a wheelchair she has a better arm than i do at my best.