tv The Rachel Maddow Show MSNBC January 23, 2018 6:00pm-7:00pm PST
immigrants, they think gays are somehow displacing them, taking what is rightfully theirs and these people are out to claim it. they believe and some really interesting polling, they think that they are the victims, not african americans, not guys in terms of discrimination in america. that's how twisted it is. >> thank you both for being with me tonight. >> thank you, chris. that is "all in" for this evening. "the rachel maddow show" starts now. thank you. >> good evening. thank you, my friend. appreciate it. we will be joined live this hour by chuck schumer, the top democrat in the senate. we are about to get his first interview since the government shutdown. senator schumer had protesters outside his house tonight in brooklyn. there is a very robust and angry debate going on about why that shutdown happened anyway. why schumer and democrats volted to end it after three days on the terms in which they voted to
end it. senator schumer will be here live in just a few minutes. again, his first interview since that shutdown. all right. it has been a very busy news day. i want to start in june of last year. june 8th. that's the day the vently fi re fired james comey gave a full day after testimony before republicans running the various congressional investigations into the russia scandal realized that open hearings were a bad idea. that having these important witnesses give incredibly and dramatic compelling testimony under oath on the russia scandal on tv all day long, this is before they realized that would feel way too much like the watergate hearings and they shouldn't let that go on any longer. as they have been doing behind closed doors since then the on that day in june that james comey testified in congress about his fbi director and what
he knew and about his firing by president trump, james comey said something in that testimony that was very memorable and very mysterious about the attorney general, jeff sessions. remember the major point of james comey's testimony that day was that the president had repeatedly pressured him as head of the fbi that he should drop the russia investigation, that he should lift the cloud that was looming over the trump presidency because of these on going criminal and counter intelligence russia investigations, comey says the president asked him to direct the fbi to let go of the investigation into trump national security advisor mike flynn. so james comey testified about those interactions with the president. he testified that he made notes detailed notes describing the president's directors to him after he had the communications with the president and explained under oath he shared the notes
of what the president had done in realtime. he shared them with other season yo -- senior members of the fbi but explained he didn't share those things with the attorney general. all right? this is a very mysterious thing he testified to. this is very serious stuff. he was very unnuerved by what te president done and took copious notes and shared that information with the senior leadership of the fbi so other people would know what happened so there would be documentation of what had happened because he knew it was such a big deal. but even though the fbi is part of a larger organization, part of the justice department and even though he was very aware that this was serious as a heart attack, this was a very serious thing, james comey made adele lib r -- a deliberate decision, he would not go upstairs and tell the attorney general what just happened and in that testimony before congress, he explained why not.
>> okay. you have the president of the united states asking you to stop a an investigation, that's an important investigation. what was the response of your colleagues? >> i think they were as shocked and troubled by it as i was. some said things that led me to believe that. i don't remember exactly. the reaction was similar to mine. they were experienced people that never experienced such a thing so they were very concerned and the conversation turned to what should we do with this information? and that was a struggle for us. because we are the leaders of the fbi so it's been reported to us in that i heard it and i've shared it with the leaders of the fbi, our conversation was should we share this with any senior officials at the justice department? our concern is we can't infect the investigative team. we don't want the agents and analysts working on this to know
the president of the united states has asked and when it comes to the president, i took it as a direction to get rid of this investigation because we're not going to follow that request and so we decided we got to keep it away from the troops. is there anybody else we got to tell. we considered whether to tell the attorney general, decided that didn't make sense because we believed he would shortly recuse. >> so the senior leadership at the fbi is all in on what the president has just told comey but they decide they are not going to report this to the attorney general, this troubling behavior by the president trying to shut down the russia investigation and as james comey explains, they decided not to tell the attorney general because they believe the attorney general was going to have to recuse himself from the investigation, was going to have to remove himself from it entirely. why did they think that? why did they anticipate that would happen? senator ron wyden went back to this point with james comey and drew him out about it.
>> let me general. in your statement you said you and the f birksbi leadership te denied not to discuss actions with sessions even though he had not recused himself. what was it about the attorney general's own interactions with the russians or behavior with regard to the investigation that would have let the entire leadership of the fbi to make this decision? >> our judgment, as i recall, is that he was very close to and going to recuse himself for a variety of reasons. we also were aware of facts that i can't discuss in an open setting that would make his continued engagement in a vurusa relation problematic. >> we were aware of facts we can't discuss to make his continued engagement in a russia related investigation
problematic. can't discuss in an open investigation but we knew things that let us know what a problem it would be to stay involved to anything related to russia. what were those things? did you know? this was an intriguing question left open by james comey when he testified before congress in june. we had no idea what he was talking about until "the washington post" had this scoop. sessions discussed trump campaign related matters according to u.s. russian intelligence intercepts. t ambassadors said he discussed campaign-related matters with the presidential race. the accounts of two conversations were intercepted by u.s. spay agencies which monitor the communications of
senior officials. jeff sessions failed to disclose his contacts with kislyak and the information comes from u.s. intelligence on kislayak's communications with the kremlin. it's remarkable jeff steessions stayed on and that he didn't quit or was fired. he insisted in person and under oath that he had no coffin tant with russians or anybody conn t connected with the russian government? >> i'm not aware of any of those activities. i been called a surrogate at a time or two and did not have communications with the russians. >> attorney general saying i didn't have communications with the russians under oath. that was in january.
on march 1st, the washington pose repo post said oh, yes, you did. he said he would no longer oversee anything having to do with the 2016 campaign. in recruiting himself, even still, he kept up the denials. >> let me be clear, i never had meetings with russian operatives or russian intermediaries about the trump campaign. >> so in january he says i definitely didn't meet with russians. in march, okay, i met with russians but it wasn't about any campaign related matters. it was about campaign related matters. the ambassador called home and
what u.s. intelligence agencies heard him say was that in fact he talked to attorney general jeff sessions about the campaign. now, that ends up being important given the news we learned today. michael schmidt was first to report jeff sessions, the attorney general, top u.s. law enforcement was interviewed for hours by the special counsel robert mueller. we don't know the scope of the special counsel's questions for the attorney general. we don't know if it's of interest to the special counsel but the attorney general has apparently made repeated fact misstatements about the frequency of the communications and content of those communications. lying about contact with the russian government is something that is already brought about guilty pleas from felony charges from the trump campaign that have been cooperating witnesses from the government. i think we can assume the attorney general is smart enough
that he wouldn't lie about his contact with the russian government to robert mueller. [ laughter ] >> to the special counsel of his investigators but he has repe repeatedly said untrue things about the contacts in the past including under oath. so we don't know if jeff sessions' own contracts and communications and statements about the contacts and communications will be of direct interest. jeff sessions headed up the national security and foreign policy teams on the campaign during the election. that means both men who have pled guilty and become cooperating witnesses in the investigation thus far both reported to him during the campaign. so that may also be of interest to the special counsel. but there is another reason why that early mysterious morning from james comey about the attorney general is newly important to what has just happened in today's news and that's because jeff sessions,
the attorney general, he isn't the only high-ranking person in this president ee's orbit that' been caught in a bad spot specifically because the intelligence community heard it because of intelligence intercepts. right? because of surveillance. jeff sessions tried to deny he met with russian officials. later when he had to admit he did meet with russian officials, he trieded ied to say he didn't discuss the russian campaign. they captured a russian official describing contacts in a call home to the kremlin. intelligence intercepts that brought down mike flynn. we know from the statement of his offense in the criminal case that mike flynn also tried to deny contacts with the russian government, tried to lie about the content of the communications with the russian government and u.s. intelligence intercepts, u.s. intelligence surveillance of the russian ambassador proved him wrong.
that's what put mike flynn in the pickle he finds himself. the same thing with presidential son-in-law jared kushner. may 26th, quote, according to intercepts of russian communications reviewed by u.s. officials, russian ambassador sergey kislyak discussed the possibility of a secret and secure communications channel between the transition and cl kremlin. he suggested using diplomatic facilities in the united states for those come maun camunicatio. caught him at a time he was trying to say he had no contacts with the russian government and a secret back channel using russian facilities to shield those communications from the u.s. government. well, now, just in the past fau d -- few days it's happened
again. entis and osnos on the show last night, this report that once again, u.s. intelligence intercepts, u.s. surveillance of foreign government officials caught out, again, jared kushner. quote shs u. quote, u.s. intelligence agencies target the chinese ambassador's reports to beijing about the meetings in the united states. according to current and former officials briefed about chinese communications, chinese oc officials said their baam basketball to -- a ambassador discussed it. it's the surveillancsurveillanc. it's the intercepts over and over again with the different senior people and trump campaign and administration. they make public denials or they make denials to the fbi and then those denials got blown out of the water by evidence,
specifically by intelligence intercepts. by surveillance information, collected by intelligence agencies while surveilling foreign government officials. the intelligence intercepts keep getting them. how do you fix that problem? if you see that as a problem, how do you fix that? well, republicans and congress are dramatically stepping up their efforts to attack and undermine the fbi and now very specifically going at the fbi to try to make a scandal out of their collection of intelligence intercepts. as attorney general jeff sessions was being interviewed by special counsel robert mueller and prosecutors at the end of last week, republicans in the house were opening up a new offensive to shut down the russia investigation some other way. house republicans have written a memo indicting the fbi for it's collection of intelligence intercepts until the russia
investigation. these republican written talking points indicting the fbi say that the fbi's surveillance tactics in the russia investigation, the means by which they collect information on foreign sources, that itself is the scandal here. that republican memo designed to attack the fbi specifically on intelligence intercepts, that i'm guessing should probably becoming out any day now. i wouldn't be surprised if it came out late tonight or tomorrow morning the way they try to get that out. but while trump supporting in congress are going after that key and deadly core competence of u.s. law enforcement and u.s. intelligence in this investigation, they are also continuing to collect scalps at the fi brkfbi itself. let's go back to the dramatic comey testimony. as i mentioned before, he left that dramatic open question
hanging out there about why they didn't tell jeff sessions what he thought was troubling behave yr abo about the president. james comey explained why he didn't tell jeff sessions about that given what we now know to be session's own implication about the scandal. the reason he was explaining that is because there are a bunch of other people who he did tell and told them for a very specific reason. >> i knew there might come a day i would need a record what happened not just to defend myself but the fbi and our integrity as an institution and investigative function. >> who did you talk with about that lifting the cloud, stopping the investigation back at the fbi and what was their response? >> i discussed the lifting the cloud in the request with the senior leadership team who was
the deputy director, the general counsel, the deputy director chief counsel and i think in a number of circumstances, number three and a few conversations included the head of the branch. that group of us that lead the fbi when it comes to national security. >> that's who he tells. let's think about the circumstance. this is a very serious thing. the fbi director is rattled. he believes the president of the united states is die re directi to shut down the fbi into the president's campaign. he concludes that the president may very well deny that he ever exerted that pressure or said those things to the fbi director:thedirecto director. the fbi director wants can
operating support for what he witnessed in terms of the president's behavior and statements so he preserves the evidence, right? he writes it down himself and tells senior leadership at the fbi contemporaneousrly in the moment and when he testifies, he doesn't list the other officials but we have been able to figure out who most of them were based on their titles and this is important for all of us. if the president of the united states is going to be potentially criminally liable for obstruction of justice in this matter, pressuring the fbi to drop the russia investigation, firing the fbi director when it didn't happen, if that's a potential criminal liability for the president of the united states, then the people who have the evidence, they are really important, right? that list of senior fbi officials brought in by jiames comey, those are people who can
retain and support the evidence of what the president did. right? these are the people who will provide that evidence, who can support the evidence that comey collected. and it's a short list. right? one is james comey himself, right? well, the president fired him already and the white house and republicans in congress have been smearing james comey and denouncing him as a terrible person to under main his credibility. one of the other people who comey broug ht in, andrew mccab who the president has also been publicly denouncing for months. he's now reportedly getting retired out of the fbi within the next pew wefew weeks. retired out at the old age of 49. there is reports that the attorney general is pressuring the current fbi director to get mccabe out of there from "the
washington post" and cnn and axios.com that the current fbi director threatened to resign if he was removed from the fbi but we believe he's going to retire out shortly. one of the other corroborating witnesses was the general counsel of the fbi jim maker that remains for now but misster ju -- mysteriously been reassigned. nobody knows why he's been ousted from his senior position and busted down to a spot where he's responsible for watering the plants basically, but the president has been taking shots at him publicly, as well and jim under comey and hi successor. he announced he's out. this follows republicans in congress taking shots at him trying to construe him as a partisan. if there is an obstruction of
justice case to make, there is six people on the list we know of in on the evidence and have evidence of the president's behavior. of the six, four of them have been ousted or sidelines at fbi and smeared by the white house and republicans, four of the six. when comey came up with the evidence that the president had tried to on strubstruct justice tried to destroy comey. comey thought ahead and had backup. now they are destroying his "th special counsel is pursuing an interview with the president himself soon in coming weeks and the focus of that interview will be obstruction of justice. quote, special counsel's office has indicated that the two central subjects investigators wish to discuss are the departures of flynn and comey and events surrounding their firings. as fbi deputy director gets
pushed out, "the washington post" reported right after president trump fired james comey, he summed mccabe to the oval office. according to several and current officials, the two men exchanged please sentries but before long, trump asked mccabe a pointed question, whom did he vote for in the 2016 election? mccabe said he did not vote according to the officials. nevertheless, trump vented anger to mccabe over donations hi ws e wife received from a political action committee by a close friend of clinton. he found the conversation with trump disturbing aconsidercordi one officialment they . they expressed a senior agent would be asked how he voted and criticized for his wife's political leanings by the president. quote, one person said the trump
mccabe conversation is of interest to special counsel robert mueller. carol leaning from "the washington post" joins us next. except for these two fellows. this time next year, we're gonna be sitting on an egg. i think we're getting close! make a u-turn... u-turn? recalculating... man, we are never gonna breed. just give it a second. you will arrive in 92 days. nah, nuh-uh. nope, nope, nope. you know who i'm gonna follow? my instincts. as long as gps can still get you lost, you can count on geico saving folks money. i'm breeding, man. fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent or more on car insurance.
your insurance on time. tap one little bumper, and up go your rates. what good is having insurance if you get punished for using it? news flash: nobody's perfect. for drivers with accident forgiveness, liberty mutual won't raise your rates due to your first accident. switch and you could save $782 on home and auto insurance. call for a free quote today. liberty stands with you™ liberty mutual insurance.
in the last 12 hours we learned the current attorney general and former fbi director was interviewed by the special counsel's team. jeff sessions was interviewed for hours last week. james comey was reportedly interviewed before the turn of the year last year by special counsel robert mueller and his team. as republicans and congress keep up their attacks trying to
undermine the fbi and senior leadership over the russia investigation amid reports that the attorney general himself has been pressuring the director to get rid of senior officials, "the washington post" broke the news that shortly after a fired fbi director james comey, president trump summoned the deputy director andrew mccabe into the oval office. once mccabe was there, the president reportedly demanded that mccabe tell him who he voltvol voted for until the 2016 election. the director responded that he did not vote this matter, this conversation is now reportedly a matter of interest to robert mueller. amid these breaking news stories today, we also learned in the washington post, robert mueller wants to talk to the president in coming weeks about perhaps the two highest profile excites from his administration, those of michael flynn and james comey, one of the reporters behind that scoop joins us now.
thanks very much for being here. it's been a heck of a busy day. >> it's been pretty busy at the washington post today. >> yeah. it's -- i feel like every time i stop clicking refresh on the front page, i'm being irresponsible. >> yeah. >> let me ask you about your reporting specifically on the interest in the special counsel in talking to the president. there has been previous reporting that a potential appearance by the president in front of the special counsel was being negotiated, that the president's legal team was offering ways that they wanted to do it, there was some discussion or speculation as to what the special counsel team might want to talk to the president about. what is the -- how far can we explain now in terms of how far those negotiations have gone? >> so in early january, which feels like a year ago now but it's only a few weeks, we reported basically that mueller had made his first signal to the
trump lawyer team. look, i'm going to be interested in interviewing the president and that shouldn't be shocking to anybody that the special counsel wants to question the person who headed up the campaign, the transition team and ultimately the oval office that is the center of the probe. however, what is new and interesting since is that in the last week or two, we understand the special counsel has made clear to the legal team the topics he wants to probe and question the president about. and because those are squarely in the area of the president's own actions, your firing mr. president of michael flynn or pushing him out of office and your firing in may of 2017 the fbi director james comey. we know this is a probe very much focused on the president's actions, decisions and also,
whether or not he or any of his other aids sought to blunt and thwart this counter intelligence into russian meddling in the 2016 election. you asked what do we know about the negotiations? we know is the legal team for the president crafted what they hope to get from mueller. and our sources tell us that mueller will receive this and decide as he will because ultimately he has the power to issue a subpoena to the president and doesn't have to meet demands coming from the witness. >> that's an important point. one of the things hard to view as a layman outsider, as a citizen watching this stuff is
how much negotiation there ought to be. how much the special counsel feels he must negotiate these terms with the legal team, whether it's about the exact circumstances how and where the president testifies or whether they actually need to disclose in advance to the president's legal teal the ground that they will cover. and feel limited to that. >> it seems like a natural courtesy. when you were a federal investigator or prosecutor and requesting an interview with the president, it's not a small matter. there is some precedent of proving establishing that you really need the president's testimony and you can't learn what he has to say from any other document or any other method, that there is something relevant and important to your probe, it not a small matter. that being said, previous
investigators negotiate because generous terms, if you will, about the way in which this interview will take place. some have gotten a little more rough as when ken star and bill clinton's legal team squared off and ultimately, the star investigation subpoenaed bill clinton. he was the first president to be interviewed under grand jury y subpoena and hooked up by live audio and video link to a grand jury. i don't think it will get to that with president trump but i don't think that the trump legal team will get everything they want or what they want and the questions and the ability to submit on behalf. we'll see and you don't know the special counsel office is going to agree to that. >> i would want that, too. we shall see how this flushes
out. national reporter and incredible thank you for being here. >> thanks. >> we got much more ahead tonight. chuck schumer, the top democrat is about to join us live. forced interview since the government shut down. stay with us. sometimes we imagine things far worse than they truly are. but we, er, take a deep breath and do our taxes with turbotax. now a cpa can review your return with you, am i getting my maximum refund? i checked it, ma'am. you're good to go. see, nothing to be afraid of at all... hello? intuit turbotax. i'm the one clocking in when you're clocking out. sensing your every move and automatically
there's somethingdoing toyou may be missing. a key part of your wellness that you may be... overlooking. it's your eyes. that's why there's ocuvite, from bausch + lomb. as you age your eyes can lose vital nutrients. ocuvite helps replenish those nutrients. ocuvite has lutein, zeaxanthin, and omega-3. nourish your eyes to help them be their healthy best. ocuvite eye vitamins. be good to your eyes. tbut we'd argue, mores, than 7 wonders. for a limited time, enjoy two free perks like complimentary wifi, and drinks,
washington d.c. and he sometimes gets protests at his home in brooklyn even when he's not there, which is tonight. this comes after the end of a three-day government shutdown many thought would be a means of democrats forcing some progress in the law for d.r.e.a.m.ers, for young people brought here as kids who are now facing deportation under the trump administration. the shutdown did not achieve anything concrete for the d.r.e.a.m.ers, other than a vague prom muise they would worn it and might allow a vote on it in the future. the vagueness of that prospect and realization republicans in the house have no intention at all of fixing anything for the d.r.e.a.m.ers, even if the senate miraculously does something, that provided a very hard landing after this weird three-day shutdown for democratic leader chuck schumer in particular and he join us here live since the shutdown next.
i thought i married an italian. my lineage was the vecchios and zuccolis. through ancestry, through dna i found out that i was only 16% italian. he was 34% eastern european. so i went onto ancestry, soon learned that one of our ancestors we thought was italian was eastern european. this is my ancestor who i didn't know about. he looks a little bit like me, yes. ancestry has many paths to discovering your story. get started for free at ancestry.com
jimmy's gotten used to his whole yup, he's gone noseblind. odors. he thinks it smells fine, but his mom smells this... luckily for all your hard-to-wash fabrics... ...there's febreze fabric refresher. febreze doesn't just mask, it eliminates odors you've... ...gone noseblind to. and try febreze unstopables for fabric. with up to twice the fresh scent power, you'll want to try it... ...again and again and maybe just one more time. indulge in irresistible freshness. febreze unstopables. breathe happy.
this is food made to sit down for. slow down for. put the phone away, and use a knife and fork for. and with panera catering, it's food worth sharing. panera. food as it should be. we had a government shutdown for three days from friday to monday that's over now and seems feasible we'll have another one two weeks from thursday, which is when the government is slated to run out of money again. this is as they say, no way to run a country. joining us now for his first interview since the three-day shutdown is senate democratic
leader chuck schumer. thank you for being here. >> hi, rachel, good to hear from you again. >> liberals and a lot of democrats are furious with you right now the way they see this shutdown is that democrats raise the prospect, raised hopes by sticking together through the shutdown and sticking to their principles, they could get protection for the d.r.e.a.m.ers passed into law that didn't happen. democrats split and voted to reopen the government without that happening. what is your response to that anger? >> well, look, we advanced the cause. what people have to understand and i think most people do, most of the democrats here on capitol hill perfectly understand, we don't have the levers of power. we have a republican president, republican senate, a republican house, all three of the most anti immigration that there is, so we have to be smart and thoughtful and careful about how we advance the cause. and i sat down with president trump on friday and offered him
quite a bit. he made an offer for a wall. i said if we do full d.r.e.a.m.ers, we'll give you the deal and he basically agreed. we were close. then he pulled out and backed off so now i've taken the wall off the table because they backed out of that deal and then he shut the government down. for two days the government was shut down but all of us in the democratic caucus, not just the moderates but liberals came to the view that if we carried it on much longer, two things would happen. a, no one was budge. the public would lose support of the shutdown. the public does not like shutdowns and we would lose support for d.r.e.a.m.ers, too, because people love the d.r.e.a.m.ers but don't want the government shut down for it. we cut the best deal we could. it's more than a vague promise, rach rachel. mcelderconnell said on the floo said on the floor we will definitely get a vote on february 8th of a bipartisan
bill on draer.r.e.a.m.ers that my okay. it will be a good bill. the thing about the promise, he didn't just make it to me. he made it to ten republican members of the caucus. a leader is very, very reluctant. so now we have a chance to get 60 votes for d.r.e.a.m.ers in the senate. and i met today with the d.r.e.a.m.ers and all the other groups and we all agreed we're goi going to focus our energy on fighting the fight we have now. every democrat, all 49 are for d.r.e.a.m.ers. if we get four or five more, we can get the vote in the senate. you say that's not the house, that's correct. nothing will force the house because mcconnell refused to put any of the dreamer legislation on the must-pass bill. that was the hope when friday night began and trump shut the government down. but if we pass it in the senate with a bipartisan vote, we have
a good chance to put pressure on the house to do it, particularly if they don't do it by march 5th, the awful, awful, awful pictures of d.r.e.a.m.ers being deported, i think will rally the nation and the house will be forced to do it. so this was what we thought was the best shot we had. you know, when trump shut the government down and we wouldn't go along, it's the first time democrats do it for d.r.e.a.m.ers because we care but we have to use the few tools we have to get the best result. >> on sunday night you turned down the chance to vote for the funding of the government without the things that you were standing up for, with the strategy you're describing here but then the following day, yesterday, you took that same deal that you had turned down the night before and i hear what you're saying in terms of what power you had but that can't have been the plan to stand up for it for a few days and ultimately vote -- >> no, we didn't have -- rachel, we didn't have the offer until
late sunday night. susan collins who has been a good person on this came to my office. i said the vague promise mcelderconnell made isn't enoug. we need him to commit that a, we would get a vote on a clean bill, b, that it would be a vote of a bill that i okayed so it couldn't be a fake bill or a bill filled with lots of poison pills and would come to the floor a specific time, the week of february 8th. is there a guarantee mcconnell keeps his word? no. we'll hold his feet to the fire and everyone in your audience who cares about d.r.e.a.m.ers should focus on mcconnell. that's what we agree to today. we had a very good hemeeting. there was a lot of upsetness, not of us but because the d.r.e.a.m.ers haven't gotten what they need and the time is ticking but everyone agreed the focus should be on mcconnell and the republican senators. democrats are all for d.r.e.a.m.ers and to get in a
circular firing squad when we don't have the power and have to used limited power we have. that's what makes sense, focussing on the republicans sbl senator, i'm not a poll giitici and i know you're a good one. >> you're good at understanding this. >> i have tried to explain people's behavior for a living. that's what i try to do. >> yes. >> looking at this from a strategic point of view, every passing day more people who were brought here as kids are closer to deportation because of that. the way this fight unfolded doesn't feel like it got us closer to solving that problem, even though you're saying it -- >> you know what, rachel -- >> the reason it doesn't feel like we're closer is because republicans think they won this. republicans think that democrats stood up for something and caved and that essentially gives them a scalp that emboldened them -- >> rachel, in all due respect
that we have that attitude that we can never accomplish anything, we'll lose. the d.r.e.a.m.ers who we met with who were heads of the organizations and all of us, dick durbin who has been the leader on d.r.e.a.m.ers, myself, believe we have a chance two weeks from now; is there a guarantee of success? that's what you seem to be asking for and we don't have a guarantee of success. we have to do everything we can. i'm passionate about the d.r.e.a.m.ers. my middle name is ellis, ellis island. we named the middle name of my daughter emma for emma who wrote the pope, "give me your tired, your poor." we're doing everything we can. what people have to understand is we don't have a magic wand. if we become the majority next year, if the house is the majority, we will get d.r.e.a.m.ers. obviously, we don't have the time with what trump has done but we have a chance in february, do not give up. we're only four senators short.
this last three days has focused more attention on the d.r.e.a.m.ers than ever before. we're trying to get corporate ceos who know these republicans to call. we're trying to get every citizen. we have the list of of 11 or 1o are possible who could vote for us. we only need four or five more to call, to e-mail, to write. that's what should be done here. we're doing everything we can. i don't mind the protests outside my office. i cut my teeth in the mccarthy campaign where there were protests. but i'm on their side of the dreamers, and i'm doing everything i can. we need more people to join us so we get 60 votes in the senate. and now we have a chance to get that. >> at this point in the fight, when i look at republicans in the house, i see them just over the last couple of days as becoming even more hard-line than they've ever been on this issue. steve scalise said today no deal with the house. basically, there is no chance that we're going bring this up. you see the hard-liners, the super anti-immigrant hard liners in the republican caucus. >> yes.
>> now thinking that they're going get the most anti-immigrant bill they could hope for passed through the house because they got a scalp here in the shutdown. do you think that this politics is hardening in the republican party? and if so there s if there a democratic public to try to undermine it? >> well, first, the hard right has always oh posed immigration. donald trump ran on an anti-immigration platform, the tea party is one of their fundamental values is anti-immigrant, which is horrible, disgusting. but that's who they are. but here is what we think. if the senate passes the bill and it's bipartisan, we may be enough moderate and mainstream republicans in the house, many of whom are vulnerable for reelection who will feel they have to come across particularly if these sons of guns wait until after march 5th. and i think, god forbid, but the pictures of people being deported will rally the nation, and these more mainstream republicans admit lid, not a majority of the republican party, but enough when they add
them to democrats could pass the bill. and then you have the whimsical -- that's a kind word -- donald trump. he may wake up one morning and say get this bill done. we're still in play. we're in better shape than five days ago. you're right. nothing happened for months because they control the agenda. and we've got to not lose the spirit or the fight. we can try and maybe even win. i'm not giving up. i hope you won't, rachel. >> senate democratic leader chuck schumer, thank you for talking to
us about this tonight, sir. i hope you come back and keep us apprised as these things unfold. >> you never know what happens and you've got to keep fighting. >> i hear you. thank you, sir. we'll be right back. stay with us. ...when it can get by on looks alone? why create something that stands out, when everyone expects you to fit in? it's simple. you can build a car, or you can build a cadillac. come in now for this exceptional offer on the cadillac cts.
and 26 essential vitamins and minerals, including calcium and vitamin d. boost high protein be up for it your insurance on time. tap one little bumper, and up go your rates. what good is having insurance if you get punished for using it? news flash: nobody's perfect. for drivers with accident forgiveness, liberty mutual won't raise your rates due to your first accident. switch and you could save $782 on home and auto insurance. call for a free quote today. liberty stands with you™ liberty mutual insurance.
choose from hard tops, sedans, convertibles, station wagons. see, test drive and compare the economy champ of all compacts, the lark. >> the lark, by studebaker. the lark was a compact car. started hitting the road in 1959. now in the beginning, it was a teeny, teeny tiny little two-door sedan. but by 1961, the fine folks at studebaker had an engineeringbreak breakthrough, sort of. at least that's how they pitched it. >> feel cramped in the compact? when you close the doors of your compact, do the passengers feel like this? maybe you should have looked at
the lark by studebaker first. roomy comfort for six people. the only compact that gives you that big car feeling, lavish interiors, rich fabrics or pleated vinyl. give the lark that continental touch. >> that continental touch. it's got pleated vinyl. so it feels bigger. the 1961 studebaker lark was not just a compact sedan, they literally advertised it as a clown car. yeah, it may look small on the outside, but room for you and everybody on the inside. did we mention the vinyl is pleated? the lark. that clown car dynamic is playing out in our politics right now in a story with a surprisingly huge number of people crammed inside it. by now you may have heard that for the first time in nearly 20 years, we are sending a sitting american president to the elite of the elites, the world economic forum in davos, switzerland. the last sitting president to go to davos was bill clinton in the
year 2000. president trump is going this year. he is scheduled to arrive tomorrow. there is a question as to whether the government shutdown would derail the plans, but the trip is on. here is my question, though. whose still going to be in washington when the president gets there? have you seen the list of people who are going? it's a big thing for the president alone to be going to davos. but look at everybody he is bringing. all of these people are going to davos. the president. also treasury secretary steve mnuchin, john kelly, rex tillerson, h.r. mcmaster, director of the economic national count gary cohn, senior adviser to the president and jared kushner. secretary of energy rick perry, kirstjen nielsen, and he's also bringing -- oh, yeah, secretary of labor, secretary of transportation, the u.s. trade representative, the director of the national institutes of health, the commissioner of the fda, the assistant to the president for homeland security
and counterterrorism, and the director of strategic initiatives at the white house. plus the president. and that's just the ones we know about. when we saw this list, i wondered, a, is there going to be a designated survivor? but i also wondered if hope hicks is going to be going or ivanka trump or stephen miller. we asked the white house about that tonight, and they told us this. quote, we did not list all staff traveling, but simply said staff there are several staffers traveling who are not on that list. so it's not just it. there is even more than that. who are going. davos hosts this event every year there is lots of protesters usually. when you have that many world leaders in one place, that is inevitable. this year the protesters seem particularly inspired. trump takes the fun out of fondue. inside the president will be walking into a rooms full of folks not phased by the six feet of snow they just got in davos. in particular, he is going to be
greeted by a lot of russians. lots and lots and lots of high profile russians. particularly high profile russians from the finance sector are going to be at davos this year. executives from veb bank, the bank that met with jared kushner during the transition that he didn't disclose. also vtb bank, rumored to be the financing for trump tower moscow. sberbank, the russian who founded kaspersky labs. a lot of trump administration officials are going. i wonder who they will hang out when they're there. that does it for us tonight. we will see you again tomorrow. now it's time f"the last word with lawrence o'donnell." >> will i see you this weekend? >> no, no. because i want to work on remodeling my kitchen. >> who is going to be there to answer the phone at the white house? they're bringing the entire cabinet and the entire white house staff. >> well, there is no government shutdown. so they will have someone to