tv All In With Chris Hayes MSNBC August 25, 2017 12:00am-1:00am PDT
of this big storm. that is our broadcast tonight. thank you for being here with us. thank you from msnbc headquarters in new york. trump watch, thursday, august 24, 2017. there was a line i remember from the government sting operation in the 1970s that caught all those corrupt politicians in philadelphia and south jersey. it involved one of those being
investigated. georgy knows what georgy has done. trump watch, thursday, august 24, 2017. trump's campaign and the russian government. on tuesday, the senate judiciary committee interviewed him for more than nine hours. simpson is a former "wall street journal" investigative reporter and the co-founder of the firm gps.
the dossier had a variety of explosive allegations, included among them that the trump campaign colluded with russia to defeat hillary clinton. this is dossier authored by christopher steele, that john mccain himself brought to the attention of the form he fbi director james comey. and it brought a summary directly to president trump. it contains some very salacious and totally unconfirmed allegations as well as claims we know to be true. >> when you look at what has become public, some of the public information is very much in line with what is recorded in that dossier. and i'll give you an example. it talks about sources within the kremlin reporting that they have three goals they want to find out what support friendly u.s. persons would want. all of that is implicated in the
don jr. e-mails that have been released. i think people put too much focus on the salacious parts of the dossier. >> in february, cnn reported u.s. investigators had corroborated some of the communications. they had verified a key claim in the dossier that a russian diplomat in washington was in fact a spy. president trump for his part dismisses it altogether. >> it's all fake news, phony stuff. it didn't happen. and it was gotten by points of ours, you reported it and so did many of the other people. it was a group of points who got together, sick people. >> and after he answered
questions on tuesday, his attorney said, fusion gps is proud of the boring it has conducted and stands by it. at a town hall yesterday, chuck grassley, the head of the community was speaker viewed. >> will you personally vote for the release of the transcripts? >> i don't know why i the wouldn't. >> joining me now, richard blumenthal, senator, why do you think they should be released? >> the public has a right to know what glen simpson said to our committee. in my view, he should be coming bfrt committee in public, under oath, so that all the public can appreciate the credibility. and this dossier has some
allegations that could be very relevant to the question of whether there has been obstruction of justice. we are reviewing in the judiciary committee, investigating whether there has been obstruction of justice. particularly in the firing. there is also the special counsel. separate and apart where that dossier and the interviews with glen simpson may be relevant as well. i think it has to be protected against political interference from the president who has sought to bully and intimidate is that has threatened to draw lines around his financial dealings, we need as much of what happens before the judiciary committee to be made public because the public deserves it. >> have you seen the transcription?
are you aware of what transpired in that interview? >> i'm aware generally of what happened in the interview because i've been briefed on it. i have not seen a transcript of it. but keep in mind, your focus is very well placed. there will be many other interviews and this should set a precedent, making it public. and two of those witnesses, donald trump jr., and paul manafort, may be more significant. the meeting was attend by an associate of glen simpson. so there are ways, all of these threats beginning to tie together. >> give me, can you give us the
context for how this interview came about and why your committee felt it was crucial the talk to glen simpson, the person who oversees the firm that commissioned this document? >> good question. he prepared this dossier which implicates president trump in russia meddling in the election, and possible other wrongdoing. and he was an associate. and so he was one of the witnesses who was subpoenas to come before our committee, i know what paul manafort and donald trump jr. was also requested. as first round. i think senator grassley is taking the right approach and he is to be commended for wanting to make this testimony public because it relates to our oversight of the department of justice. the special counsel is pursuing criminal charges and we want to
make sure that anything may be made public including the tens of thousands of pages of documents that have been submitted. it does not in any way interfere with the special counsel's investigation. >> finally, can you tell us if your staff were in the briefing about what happened in this interview, have made a determination that has affected your opinion of the credibility of the underlying dossier? it is difficult for folks on the outside to wrestle with. what to make of it. has your value been altered by what you've learned? >> i'll be blunt, i'm not at liberty to talk about the sub sfans we took from glen simpson. every quid will have relevant information of varying degrees
of credibility and importance. so i think it adds to the total. keep in mind there will be other witnesses. glen simpson is only one of they will of the and i hope they'll be soon. we're in negotiations with donald trump jr. i anticipate he'll be coming before the staff very soon. paul manafort has been more resistant and that is unacceptable. we'll have to use subpoenas for a number of the witnesses. >> thank you for your time. joining me, the author of the plot to hack america. a trump dossier expert. >> this transcript, nine answers of questions is a lot.
do you think from an investigative standpoint, it is good to make that public? >> well, there are two different things. it is a great question because it is important for the public's right to know what is going on in government. what mueller is doing is he's trying to build a case for criminal charges. and they said this they would talk to him and making sure they wouldn't impede his investigation. the people following me on twitter are interested in this investigation and want to know what's going on. they have a right to know what's happening behind the scenes. and they're concerned about their government. from that perspective it is important to make this public. >> the emphasis was well placed.
as someone who has followed this day by day, for a year, over a year, why is this document at the heart of this story? >> the document itself, it provides the framework for everything there is to know that b the motivations of the russians and the trump campaign. when i wrote my book, it was an intelligence analysis based on the open source investigation of what i thought the russian are intelligence operation had to be. the steel dossier has the details of how the kremlin and people associated with the trump campaign put that into motion, and how they actually weaponized all of this information. things in that camp, that dossier, have been verified by, and overtaken by acts. >> i want to be clear. >> no, no.
36 pages. some of which are hotly contested. the biggest remarkable claim is that trump was being cultivated for years as a long term project. that is what makes my eyes widen the most. >> that's what i wrote about in my book. this had to have started in the 2012, 2013 period. i estimate 2013 because the miss universe pageant gave donald trump a platform inside of russia to where he was completely exposed to all the wonders of the russian oligarchy.
and that's an incredible dangle out in front of a person. but did the cell lynn cultivate him over dough the kremlin cultivate him as a candidate? even i didn't believe that. >> they collect people who are sympathetic. >> seeing his presidential aspirations. >> one of the things we've learned in the last few days. how much the president hates it and how much he likes the call up senators to berate them about it. he thinks he's innocent and it is unfair or he's guilty and trying on cover it up. what do you make of calling up bob corker, to berate them that
they're not protecting him in this investigation? >> i think that's evidence that mueller is going to use to potentially prove an obstruction of justice charge against the president. to prove that, the special counsel is going to have to prove that the president acted with corrupt intent. that he offered with an improper purpose in trying to fire and many shut down the investigation. and all of that shows a really intense interest by the president in the russia investigation. and in ending it, having an ability to fire mueller. and basically, he is his own worst enemy again. i think the president is creating more fodder for bob mueller. >> the person i want to hear from is steele himself. deemed credible in the intelligence world. this is not a random internet person.
>> i think they'll be work a day and professional. i think they'll be interviewing him. not interrogating him. he'll be giving them tips and hints and clues. some have said he misspelled this word and that word. that's a relatively solid intelligence document. it is rumor intelligence. those rumors, which we also use in the u.s. intelligence community, have to be worked up into verifiable and trusted intelligence. i think as a pro like him having worked the russia desk, having been an mi 6 operative, he will give them the exact path way they need to go to verify or refute this information using
our own intelligence collection processes. >> all right. thank you both for being here tonight. >> serious people and serious questions. tonight white house responds on the president's stability. and next, as he continues to taunt republican leadership, did he just fence himself in? ake anything happen. neutrogena® rapid wrinkle repair works in just one week. with the fastest retinol formula to visibly reduce wrinkles. neutrogena®.
that's why at comcast we're continuing to make4/7. our services more reliable than ever. like technology that can update itself. an advanced fiber-network infrustructure. new, more reliable equipment for your home. and a new culture built around customer service. it all adds up to our most reliable network ever. one that keeps you connected to what matters most. the american people voted for immigration control. that's one of the reasons i'm here. one way or the other, we'll get that wall. donald trump seems determined to do something that hasn't been done in almost 40 years, shut down the government when only one partier runs all of it.
the last government shounl was in 2013 which republicans widely took blame for. right now, gop leaders seem intent on preventing that from happening again. i don't think anyone is interested in having a shutdown. and there was a statement, the president and i and our teams have been and continue to be in regular could not fact our shared goals. now, shutting down the government to fund a border wall wasn't one of they will. meanwhile in her first press conference, sarah huckabee sanders couldn't give a straight whabls asked about the president's game of chicken. >> the president was asked over and over again, he said that mexico would pay for the wall. why is he now threatening a government shutdown if congress won't pay for it? >> the president is committed to making sure this gets done. we know that the wall and other security measures at the border work. we've seen it take place and
we're committed to make should have goneture american people are protected and we'll continue to push forward and make sure the wall gets built. >> here to talk about whether republican leaders want are it. >> we have to secure our borders. we have to lower people's taxes. we have to get a health care policy. we have to raise the debt ceiling, do flood insurance. we'll have a busy fall. >> yes. many want to see the balanced budget.
had the president has declared if it takes a shutdown to pay for the wall, there will be a shutdown. i think the president is frustrated. he came to washington with very ambitious agenda. he wants to do health care, infrastructure bill, and he had to do it all in his first year. everybody knows you get more in the first year than the second year. he went to put a travel pause in place from six countries that we don't have an adequate vetting process through. already, the courts haved him no only. congress didn't do anything on the health care. that failed. i think the president is getting frustrated. he is used to doing things quickly and he knows even in his four-year term. he is almost a quarter of the way through his term. whose fault is that? >> i'll not sure it is anyone's fault. i think congress runs slower than anyone anticipated. i've been there two and a half years.
i hoped we on get it done. >> the president, he doesn't tend to sell these policies in any detail. you saw the health care bill, right? we saw the fight happening. it struck me, the president couldn't go more than a few sentences on what the health care bill would do. i think the president, when he walked in the door, he said here's the seekence you have to do these. you puft do health care first because it has tax implications. after that, in order to pay for the infrastructure bill, you need to get money out of the tax bill. i think he talked about this and the president's son believes the health care policies of the country are important but he wanted to get it done so he could get to the other things that were really interesting to him. >> there are lots of things we want to do in our lives. but to get them done, you have to put in effort and know what you're doing. does president have sufficient command to be help envelop getting things done? >> i think so. >> he's a very influential man. a very successful businessman.
he influenced enough americans to vote for him to become leadert of the free world. >> those are different things though. >> in the health care debate, he was very much involved. he was sending people to capitol hill. vice president pence, tom price, if it takes shutting down the government, that's what he'll do. the president said mexico would pay for it. >> the representative from brooklyn will never vote to shut down the government. >> it will be your party. you'll be facing a democratic challenger, whoever it is next year. and you've got to see that people will be eyeing for a pick-up. and the argument is, they'll
shut down the president so the government can get money to pay for a wall that he promised mexico would pay for. >> and i don't think it will come to that. i think this is trying to put pressure on the senate and the house. we passed about 256 that are in the senate with no action. so we've done a lot of work that people don't know about. it is our job to tell they will. so let's get something done west promised the american people we would get all these things done is that one of the things was to build the wall. >> thank you for your time. ahead, the president declared national emergency and nothing happened. the growing frustration over no progress informing president's supposed emergency declaration of opioids.
this week it's robert e. lee. i noticed stonewall jackson is coming down. is it george washington next week and thomas jefferson, the week after? you're changing history, culture. it is time to expose the crooked media desepgss and to challenge the media for their role in momenting divisions. and yes, by the way, they are trying to takeaway our history the president and like minded people would like people to believe that monuments are history rather than white supremacy. but you don't to have scratch
too far below the surface to see which of those is the correct interpretation. the county clerk announced he was removing a confederate flag and two pictures of robert e. lee and stonewall jackson from the courtroom. a judge dismissed the suit pointing out the plaintiff doesn't even live in york county or even in south carolina. so what was his rational for firing suit? >> i don't believe it is a symbol of racism. i don't believe it is a symbol of slavery. that's my personal view. it would be ludicrous to me to tell you how it feel. >> then he let slip what he really thinks. >> i don't believe it is a symbol of race i or slavery. that's my personal view. how they feel is their business.
it would be ludicrous for me to tell you how they feel. hey, i go down the street, i see martin luther king. i mean, should i rip the signs down? it says they take martin luther king street down and the rest of that stuff? >> should i rip down the sign? when it comes to defending confederate monuments, the most honest voices the white nationalists and the nazis who were chanting blood and soil in charlottesville two weeks ago. those folks are 100% right about what that statue stands for.
i've outlined today a detailed plan to stop the opioid crisis. it begins with a strong worder and includes the prosecution of drug dealers and dramatically expands access to life saving treatment that's will help people unchain themselves from this terrible, terrible and very hard to get rid of addiction. >> like many candidates, he spoke regularbly the opioid crisis. it probably helped win him some votes and trump attributed it to the crisis. i won hal happen because hal happen is a drug infested den.
in march he started a commission to look at the crisis and he wrote, the first and most urgent recommendation of the commission is direct is that completely within your control. declare a national emergency. trump ignored that recommendation. two days later, he abruptly reversed course. the opioid crisis is an emergency and i'm saying officially right now, it is an emergency. a national emergency. we're going to spend a lot of time and money on the opioid crisis. we're going to draw it up and make it a national emergency. >> draw it up. that was two weeks ago. nothing has been drawn up. no emergency funds, no emergency programs, nothing.
they've done nothing. a phenomenal read, really important to understand. >> do you think it is a national emergency? >> i think so. we need to take steps to address what is one of the modern plagues that we will be visited upon in this century. absolutely a crisis. >> the numbers here astounding. and this is part of what i think is pretty remarkable about the disconnect between this commission and essentially an action. folks just look at the per 100,000 deaths. are there things this white house could be doing to help? >> so, i think it is important to look at, since president trump has been in office, he has introduced no formal legislation to combat the opioid epidemic.
he recently declared it to be a national emergency. yet he's not taken any of the legal steps to enact that legislation. if he would take legal steps, would it create access to funds, to waive restrictions to medicaid, for instance. that would make it possible to target it. would it make it for an emergency overdose reversal agent. it would make it possible the prescribe more meth don't maintenance which are proven for opioid addiction. if he would follow through on the declaration that he made a couple weeks ago, that would make a difference. at least in the short term. i think it is important to note that most of trump's efforts have gone toward dismanning the affordable care act is that it is the single piece of completion has gone further nest combatting this opioid epidemic
by expanding medicaid to allow people with opioid addiction to be treated within the house of medicine. the affordable care act has also made will opioid addiction and its treatment an essential benefit. even the grants we've had so far, although helpful, will not be sustainable. if we give people health insurance to pay for treatment. if we create a structure to care for people with addiction. this crisis is not going to be turned around in a year or two or probably even five or ten. there is a point of zpoeks the president speaks with the epidemic. the border and illegal drugs, particularly. i wonder what you make of that, your book chronicles this is
born of prescription drugs and big pharma as one of the root causes behind all this. >> so i believe that we all have an important role to play in combat in the opioid epidemic. we have to get doctors to prescribe fewer opioids. that i believe law enforcement can play a role here. the important piece to understand is that although we cannot arrest our way out of this epidemic, we can't prescribe our way out of this epidemic. and importantly, although law enforcement can play a role, the role that they need to play is getting people to treatment. or imcompleting modest, swift sanctions that encourage behavior change. what the war on drugs drgs it imposed extreme sanctions, putting people in jail for carrying marijuana. but law enforcement can play a
role, shoring up our borders to limit the influx of illicit fentanyl. we need on acknowledge that those are ways we can intervene. i think the bigger and more important intervention will be expanding treatment to addiction and looking at our impoverished communities and what other earn theties we can give they will rather than becoming patients, living on disability and living these very sad lives of addiction. what to make of the bipartisan push to diagnose the president's mental state and house the white house is responding to questions about the president's stability. thing one. if you follow me on twitter you this kid makes stains like crazy
so does this show, by the way, which you should be falling. you have to be careful who you're retweeting. the president of the united states has 36 million followers, for some reason has a retweeting problem. it goes back to his campaign. candidate trump tweeted, it says #white genocide is real. he previously retweeted another tweeter. with a star of david over cash before changing it to a circle. well, today, president trump retweeted another mahinmi of his own likeness, eclipsing president obama. the analogy works against president trump. the thing about a solar eclipse is that although the moon wins for a fraction of time, the sun is always a billion times more powerful. obama would be the sun and a cold barren rock briefly moves in front of it. at least there's nothing
so the president of the united states retweeted a mahinmi of himself eclipsing president obama to which many twitter viewers said please leave and return us to the sunlight. but there was another issue. the person the president retweeted, jerry trevone tweeted this, we have enough of these jews where i live lol. someone else take them. they just can't drive. he tried on explain saying he was not anti-smithic and it was just an emotional suggestion referring to lakewood, new jersey and the drivers who are mostly jewish. he wrote, i thought i was dreaming and the president took time retweet my tweet. the president of the united states took time out today to retweet that guy's meme.
more and more often is language people use to describe the president of the united states is what people would use to describe a mental state. it is not the just the twitter trolls. >> i really question his ability to, his fitness to be in this office. >> i don't say that lightly as kind of goofy guy. >> there is a growing mountain of evidence that the president has been very erratic. has shown a mental instability. >> the president has not yet been able to demonstrate the stability, nor some of the competence that he needs to demonstrate to be successful. >> this morning, the president hit back the form he intelligence director james clapper.
at the press briefing the white house press secretary asked about those last remarks we showed you. >> do you have any response to that? >> i think that's a ridiculous and outrageous claim and doesn't digfully identify a response. >> it seems notable given the press secretary was asked to have an annual physical at walter reed army medical center. >> can you tell us whether the president intends to utilize the federal facilities this year to get a physical and release that information to the public? >> i'll let you know. >> once tab other, discussions of the president's mental health are becoming increasingly main stream. a harvard law professor saying the psychologist should be able to break with professional standards to evaluate the president. and urging him to take a medical exam to determine his fitness for office.
so we got our new he washing machine but it took forever turns out it wasn't the machine, it was our detergent. so we switched to tide turbo clean. now we get way cleaner clothes way faster he turbo clean. 6x the cleaning power in 1/2 the time congresswoman lofgren is calling on the president to take a medical exam to determine if he's fit for office. and they argue that psychiatrists should be able to share the president's state of mind. i read your piece and it crystallized something that's bothering me, which is i'm seeing a lot of armchair diagnoses of the president and it strikes me as bad.
there's a reason for the prohibition, a reason for the mental health professionals not to do this called the goldwater rule and you argue this is an exception to this and hay should be able to speculate on the president's mental health, why? >> it's not so much that i think this is an exception. it's just that the rule itself seems overly broad at this point in time. there's a rule, the goldwater rule that says psychiatrists cannot speak about a public figure's mental health, cannot offer an opinion about that. but early this year in march the american psychiatric association brought no the rule father saying they can't offer their opinions about the person's affect or their personality if it draws on knowledge or training that they might have as a psychiatrist. that seems very very broad to me and i think that that rule right now is basically depriving the public of the knowledge and training of psychiatrists who
might be better informed about somebody's mental health and whether they're able to perform certain duties than the rest of the public actually is. and it's not so much that we can't see for ourselves what the president's behavior is like. it's just that we are right now experiencing a void in professional opinion because of this goldwater rule. >> congresswoman, what is the motivation behind the legislation that you've introduced? >> actually the legislation urging the vice president, along with the cabinet, to secure the assistance of medical professionals. as has been noted by your prelim into this, a lot of people are concerned about the president's behavior. he seems to lack impulse control. he swings from topic to topic. any of us who have had and older person that we know suffering from a mental decline can see certain signs that worry us,
repetition, someone who seems lost where they are. you know, when he was in israel saying we just got back from the middle east. did he not know that frederic douglas had died or was he confused. i think that if this were an obvious physical disability, let's say a massive heart attack, the vice president and the cabinet would be getting the advice of medical professionals. similarly with these questions they should get advice from medical professionals on whether this is the president just being an odd person or whether there's a problem here. >> okay. but here's the thing. it seems to me this is an impulse to medicalize the feelings that the people have about the president's personality. it could just be -- i mean, isn't it just the case that you do not like the way the president acts and so you believe that it must be some -- or it's possible there's some illness behind it?
>> no, that's really not -- it's true. i don't agree with the president. there's no question about that. but this is an entirety different matter. this is for the vice president, under the 25th amendment, and a vice president is certainly no enemy of the president, and the cabinet, all of whom have been selected by the president, to discharge their obligations under the constitution to make sure that there isn't a problem with the president's capacity to serve. if they find with the help that they get that he is, then they've satisfied that question. i'll still disagree with the president, but this is a fisness question. >> part of the reason for the goldwater rule is precisely because there's often a kind of blurring of the lines. people will casually say that person is nuts or that person is crazy. and in some ways that's a way -- it has a perverse effect of stigmatiing mental illness. and i wonder if you think that
that's -- you want to see medical professionals intervene because that's what's happening now? >> yes, that's what's happen right now. >> i'm sorry. >> people are making very very casual remarks about his mental health and i actually think that we could have the benefit of actual professionals. it may be that they may tell us that there is nothing wrong with the president. they may tell us there are problems with the president's mental health but they don't rise to the level of disabling him from performing the duties of office. we have to be open to all f 0 those professional opinions with, not just the ones that say he's unable to perform the duties of his office. and i think that range of opinions is something we would expect to' if psychiatrists were allowed to speak or permitted by their professional ethics rules but we don't see a lot of the conversation happening. we don't see that parties paying of professionals in this detail.
>> it seems to me that an examination would be good. the president has gotten lost on tv, walked off or wandered off. he don't seem to know where he is. is that because he's overtired or is that something more serious. we'll only find that out if he's examined by medical professionals. >> there's something remarkable about having this conversation. and in is a conversation that is being had in all kinds of corners, people have sort of danced around how they talk about it. your colleague jackie spears saying we have to stop whispering. i guess the question is this something republicans talk about as well toe the extent that you talk to them on the hill about this? >> i don't want to mention names, but i've never been in a personal meeting with the president and don't expect to ever. but people who have describe someone who's unable to keep track of the conversation.
is it because he doesn't want to or that he can't. that's an important question that we need an answer to. >> the core reason, right, behind the goldwater rule, at least in the narrow sense is precisely because, you know you can't evaluate someone, can't render judgments on them until you've talked to them first hand, attended to them. isn't the rule in place to sort of prevent the slippery slope and won't we get just essentially armchair diagnoses? >> i think it's a wise rule to say that a psychiatrist should not render a diagnosis without a clinical examination. but i think that where it goes too far is when we think that psychiatrists cannot speak at all about the qualities of a person that may include qualities that they may know about from their psychiatric training and knowledge. so i think that there's a way in which this rule has gone too far and expanded too far so that
psychiatrists are essentially silenced from offering opinions based on psychology and psychiatry. >> all right. congresswoman zoe lf gren and jenny thank you both. right now. tonight, donald trump's war with his own party. the president goes after mitch mcconnell and paul ryan again two fellow republicans that the republican president needs. plus it looks like congress will be asked to pay for the wall with taxpayer money. and it looks like the president is serious about his government shutdown threat if they don't come through with the funding. and predecessor obsession. how 45 just can't seem to get over 44. will he ever? "the 11th hour" upon a thursday night is zbeting under way now. and good evening once again from our nbc news headquarters here in new york. day 217 of the trump