tv The 11th Hour With Brian Williams MSNBC July 5, 2018 1:00am-2:00am PDT
you can download anywhere you want. don't forget to subscribe. thank you for joining us in this edition of "all in." details how the president spent his alone time at the white house. president obama got barely 5 hours of sleep each night. that was partly because of this elaborate routine he had in the white house. after dinner with his wife and daughters at 6:30 p.m., the president would withdraw to the treaty room, his privacy office down the hall from his bedroom on the second floor of the white house residence, and there, according to staffers, he would spend four or five hours by himself and do all the expected things like read briefs and go
over speeches. thanks to this report from the times we also know he sometimes played words with friends on his ipad. he sometimes watched sports and sometimes wrote taunting e-mails to white house staff if their teams lost in sports that night. and said memorably the president ate a late night snack of exactly seven lightly salted almonds. that part i'm not sure i ever really believed. it was during one of those late nights of alone time in the treaty room, early in president obama's presidency, the night of november 2nd, 2010, president obama put in a call to the man who was then the minority leader in the house of representatives. he called republican congressman, john boehner of ohio. he needed to call him that night because he needed to congratulate him for becoming the new speaker of the house.
he had to offer his congratulations for boehner ousting his own party from power and taking control of congress. they did so with an exclamation point that year. democrats lost six seats in the u.s. senate and lost 63 seats in the house. 63. 63 seats that had been held by a democrat instead flipped to a republican, one of the biggest single election swings, maybe the biggest. putting in that conciliatory phone call to the guy who had just kicked his team out of congress, that was not the last indignity president obama would face over that huge electoral loss, because in addition to calling john boehner from the treaty room that night, the next day he had to go out in front of everybody and face the press. >> some election nights are more fun than others. some are exhilarating, some are humbling.
but every election, regardless who wins and who loses, is a reminder in our democracy, power rests not with those of us in elected office but with the people we have the privilege to serve. i told john boehner and mitch mcconnell last night i am very eager to sit down with members of both parties and figure out how we can move forward together. >> i'm wondering when you call your friends like congressman perry or governor strickland, and you see 19 state legislatures go to the other side, governorships in swing states, the democratic party set back, what does it feel like? >> it feels bad. >> it feels bad, jake. it feels bad. >> it's not like president obama was the first president to find himself in this bad feeling spot two years into his first term. >> i think it's important to point out as well that a couple
of great communicators, ronald reagan and bill clinton were standing at this podium two years into their presidency, getting very similar questions. this is something that i think every president needs to go through, because the responsibilities of this office are so enormous and so many people are depending on what we do, and in the rush of activity, sometimes we lose track of, you know, the ways that we connected with folks that got us here in the first place. now, i'm not recommending for every future president that they take a shellacking like i did last night. you know, i'm sure there are easier ways to learn these lessons. >> thereby, the president of the
united states single-handedly revived the venacular use of the word "shellacking" for all of us. president obama was right about early presidencies. the same thing happened to ronald reagan and bill clinton in the first mid-terms of their presidencies. in reagan's first midterm, republicans lost 26 seats in the house. >> ronald reagan was trying to be as upbeat as possible. still, it was a conciliatory the same thing happened to ronald reagan and bill clinton in the first mid-terms of their presidencies. in reagan's first midterm, republicans lost 26 seats in the house. >> ronald reagan was trying to be as upbeat as possible. still, it was a conciliatory president who met with reporters, one who talked about seeking bipartisan solutions with a new congress. >> there have been concessions and compromises in both directions on all of the major issues, and we expect to continue to work with the congress in that way. >> top aides admit the election results were a shock. by white house count, only 50% of the candidates mr. reagan campaigned for won yesterday. >> that was ronald reagan in the first midterm of this is presidency, 1982.
later, 1994, the first term visited president bill clinton in an epic historical loss for the democrats. >> tonight, the sound you hear is the sound of a moving van backing up to the united states senate preparing to move in a republican majority. as of this hour republicans picked up the seven seats they need to take control of that chamber. we still do not have a reading on the house of representatives. republicans need 40 seats to gain control. they're feeling confident and across the nation there is a republican sweep under way. the last time the republicans took control of the house was 1954, when elvis presley was a 19-year-old unknown and color television was just being introduced. tim, the republican sweep, what does it mean for bill clinton? >> when bill clinton promised he'd bring change to washington, tom. this is not what he had in mind. if these trends continue, it
will be the worst democratic appearance in a race like this in 50s years. >> democrats lost eight senate seats and 52 house seats held by the then speaker of the house. that was as well years after a similar shellacking happened to ronald reagan, not eight years, sorry, never do math on live television. that first midterm for bill clinton, 1994, republicans called it their revolution at the time. it wasn't actually a revolution, a strong midterm showing by the republican party. the president himself did find himself struggling to string together the right words when he tried to describe it the next day. >> stunned by the public's rejection of his party, an exhausted bill clinton said he will work with the majority and get the voter's message. >> i think they were saying two things to me -- or maybe three -- they were saying -- maybe 300.
[ laughter ] >> i think they were saying, look, we just don't like what we see when we watch washington. we don't think government can solve all the problems, and we don't want the democrats telling us from washington that they know what is right about everything. >> the president had no choice but to take responsibility. this fall he went to five states where democrats won but in 13 states where mr. clinton campaigned, his candidates lost. in the rest of the country democrats didn't even want him to show up. the white house tried to say it was a vote against all politics but no incumbent republicans lost. >> the first midterm after a new president takes office is very often a dramatic loss for that president's party. it is normal for the president's party to lose ground, sometimes lose a lot of ground. the only exception to that rule in modern times was after 9/11, the shock of that attack and transformation of the country
and politics there after were seen as highly unusual factors that kept republicans from losing seats they might have otherwise been expected to lose in the 2002 mid-terms. with those extenuating circumstances, republicans really didn't lose ground in that first george w. bush midterm but republicans arguably paid double the next time around in 2006, after george w. bush got re-elected in '04, his party lost control of the house and senate in 2006. and that's the pattern of how it usually goes in mid-terms, the party that holds the white house usually has a bad night on midterm election nights. that's one way to think about the elections coming up this year, in historical context. you go all the way back to truman administration in 1946, look at the first midterm of a new presidency, you are looking at a sea of losses. there's a reason all those bars on that bar graph go down.
it would be normal, business as usual to expect president trump's republican party to lose ground in congress this november. of course, nothing is normal anymore. how do we tell this year? how do we tell if the historic pattern is going to hold this year, this november, in a year democrats taking control of congress would mean a completely different world in washington both in terms of policy but honestly also in terms of the myriad scandals of this new administration? how do we tell what's going to happen? short answer, i don't know. the smart money these days tends to say the generic ballot is the best metric to look at. poll on this simple question. which party do you want to be in control in washington, the generic ballot. most experts say that's the best finger in the wind for these kinds of things. the problem this year, it's been all over the place. just over the past few months, the polling on that generic ballot question swung wildly from democrats being up by 10 points to democrats being up by just one point to democrats back
up to a 10 point lead, to a dead tie. here's another metric, very human one. what do the people in congress themselves think will happen to them this november. on that metric we do have a pretty clear answer. you can call it the sinking ship metric if you're feeling a little bit rude. on the sinking ship metric, what you should look at is the sheer number of republicans who are leaving congress of their own accord before a single vote has been cast. their numbers include the speaker of the house, the top republican in congress, paul ryan, who announced in april he's retiring. paul ryan is third in line to the presidency, the highest ranking republican in congress. he's leaving, but he is in good company. on his way out the door, by our count, 39 house republicans and four senate republicans have announced they're resigning or
retiring this election cycle rather than running for re-election. yes, some democrats are leaving, too, republicans right now at least are leaving at more than double the rate of their democratic colleagues. is the simple fact that so many more republican incumbents are leaving, is that alone a determinative sign for how tough things are going to be for republicans? are the particular republicans leaving, leaving vacancies democrats have a good chance for picking up? is there any reliable metric predicting these things in an era distinguished now by how not normal everything in politics has become. joining us now is the great steve kornacki. thank you for being here. looking at the numbers, sot democrats are leaving -- some democrats are leaving, too, is this a lot of numbers on the republican side? >> it is. that 39, you can take some off because some are running for the senate, running for governor, they're not really retiring and actually see opportunity this year. you look at the core group actually retiring and walking away, that number brings you has become. joining us now is the great steve kornacki. thank you for being here. looking at the numbers, sot democrats are leaving -- some democrats are leaving, too, is this a lot of numbers on the republican side? >> it is. that 39, you can take some off because some are running for the senate, running for governor, they're not really retiring and actually see opportunity this
year. you look at the core group actually retiring and walking away, that number brings you down to 22. that 22, by comparison, think back to one of the last major election waves we had in the midterm, 2010, democrats got shellacked with barack obama, how many democrats fit into that pure retirements, 11. half the number we have now. go back to 2006, republicans got shellacked, how many did you have? you had eight. you want to find a comparable number to the number of core retirements, 22 we're seeing now, you have to go back to 1994. you had 20 democrats that year who fit the same category. that was the year democrats lost 52 seats in the house and lost control. i think it's fair to say what that number is telling us, psychologically, that's where republicans heads are in washington right now. you look at that 22, there are a lot that come from seats
potentially competitive and a lot looking at their first potentially competitive re-election race and you know what, i'm not so much in the mood for that. i will walk away. maybe i don't want to lose or lose a lot of money. psychologically, it's safe to say that's where republicans are, bracing for a potential of a wave this year. >> when you look at these things, do you think their psychological frame of mind a good metric? >> that's the interesting thing. the same republicans before election day in 2016, were calling on donald trump to drop out of the race in the wake of that "access hollywood" tape. we can't win with trump, we need pence to be at the top of the ticket. we -- the top of the ticket. we know what happened there. you look at the metrics trying to analyze these things. this is a great test, a great political science test, this midterm. we will see how these things move, if his approval rating ticks up and what we've been looking at now and the last year we're looking at a lot of traditional metrics pointing in one direction, pointing towards
what history suggests will happen this year. if that doesn't happen, one of the questions posed by 2016, are the rules of politics permanently altered or was 2016 sort of an aberration? that story will become clear as time passes. this is a key data point this year what happened this midterm. >> there is a lot more to say on this subject and other things leading to november other things i want to ask you about. don't go anywhere. steve kornacki is our guest again. don't go anywhere. 2016 was not a great time for democrats. democrats have sort have been on a roll ever since. the question whether or not that is important or predictive, stay with us. november 2016, iowa we all want to know about the new thing.
be our guest. want to save on mobile? just ask. want to demo the latest innovations and technology? do it here. come see how we're making things simple, easy, and awesome. plus come in today and ask about xfinity mobile, a new kind of network designed to save you money. visit your local xfinity store today. november 2016, iowa republicans accomplished something they had been trying for and failing at nearly 20 years. they finally took control of the entire state government. iowa had a republican governor, a republican majority in the statehouse, but before 2016 they didn't have the senate.
the iowa senate was ever so delicately still controlled by democrats, it had been for years until november 8th, 2016. donald trump won iowa by a mile. on that big red night in iowa in the state senate, republicans took the seats of six incumbent democrats including the democrats's majority leader in the senate. they took control of the senate. here was the des moines register in response. it is official. iowa has become a red state. the majority of voters chose donald trump to become president, 5 of 6 voters in iowa are republicans. republicans will take control of the legislature in january and the outcome has left many iowans fearful about the future of this state. iowa, after the 2016 election coming to this reckoning. we are a red state now. it is official. iowa has become a red state. the majority of voters chose donald trump to become president, 5 of 6 voters in iowa are republicans. republicans will take control of the legislature in january and the outcome has left many iowans fearful about the future of this state. iowa, after the 2016 election coming to this reckoning. we are a red state now. you can feel the implicit next .question. is that a permanent status?
is this who we are now forever? there followed an interesting twist in that story. a state senator passed away right before the election in 2016. iowa scheduled a special election to replace that senator and they scheduled that special for about a month and a half after the trump-clinton presidential election where iowa had gone so red. interestingly, they scheduled the special election right in the middle of the holiday season, two days after christmas. it was expected a democrat would hold onto that seat. that district voted for hillary clinton by 17 points. when they went back just seven weeks after the presidential election the democrat in that special didn't turn in the kind of performance hillary clinton had shown in that district. a democrat did not win in that district by 17 points like clinton had. a democrat won that race by 48 points, which means that district alone shifted 31 points
in democrats' direction, right after the trump-clinton election, 31 points. since then, if you look at all the special elections taken place across the country, that's been the party. it's been very clear which party had the momentum. democrats running in special elections overall have seen an average shift in their favor of 12 percentage points. if that holds, if you need to add 12 points to the average democratic margin in every race in the country, that would be a huge democratic tide, right? special elections are special. there's reasons to be cautious about extrapolate doing much. since the trump-clinton race, democrats have taken away a total of 46 seats previously held by republicans, many in the unlikeliest places, oklahoma statehouse four seats in the legislature flipped from republicans to democrats since trump was elected.
in kentucky district where they voted by a margin of 50 points, they just elected a democrat from the house for that district winning by 37 points meaning an 86 point swing in democrats' favor in kentucky. kentucky republicans are looking weak in other ways. the republican leader of the house just lost his seat in the republican primary. a first time candidate kentucky teacher took the republican leader's seat. there was the biggest flip of all flipping the senate seat in alabama previously belongs to jeff sessions. a democrat, doug jones holds the seat even though the republicans won by 28 points. they have been spooking them in red states. kansas fourth district, elected by 27 trump, mike pompeo by 31 points still in the house.
in the special election to replace mike pompeo when he got promoted to the cabinet, a democrat candidate came within six points. didn't win but close for a district that red. in arizona, republican congressman franks' district, a republican won by 20 points, then a special election to replace franks, a democratic candidate came very close to winning. it's been stark all year. is this how the mid-terms will play out? does this mean democrats get congress in november? is it possible for democrats to turn close shaves in otherwise republican places, a way to figure out how to turn them into actual wins when it counts? joining us again is this great steve kornacki. thank you for being here again.
>> sure. >> how circuit is this net swing? is this the kind of thing to predict what will happen? >> interesting so many congressional and state legislative, they are pointing overwhelmingly in one direction. i think in 2010, there were more mixed signals what proved to be a wave election year. i think we're getting a more clear one direction signal here. it says, clearly, definitely, i'm convinced the democratic base is energized in a way we haven't seen in a long time and barring totally unforeseen will be energized come november. that makes the question in the key variable, will the democratic race match that variable. you look at all the special elections for the house, this is interesting what you were just showing, the trump margin in '16 and what happened in the special election. you mentioned the last one on the list.
arizona, eight, the most encouraging for democrats. >> the franks race. >> that's right. this spring, trump won the district by 21, republican won the special by five. the reason that's significant and if you're a democratic encouraging. republicans like to say being energized and republican voters not doing that. arizona is a mail-in voting. everybody gets a ballot. republicans got ballots there, republicans sent back ballots. if you look at the composition of electorate it was comparable to 2014, a great year for republicans. this was not a surge in democratic turnout, very similar and the results changed 16 points. for democrats, that's the most encouraging one. if you look at that list and say, if you're a republican and want to point to some optimism, it would be georgia, six. the karen handle ossof race a year ago. that's the exception there. republicans will tell you
happened there, their theory, that race got nationalized in a way none of these others did. tens of millions of dollars came in. national media was there and trump was talking about it. it created this environment they say will prevail nationally in the mid-terms and get a version of georgia six everywhere. it's a theory but by the evidence, democrats have more to point to right now. >> for a nationalized race you cants nationalize everybody in the country. when everybody in the house is up you can't put tens of millions of dollars every race. steve kornacki, i will keep you around a little longer because i can. much more to come and more about steve and more about what makes for a very bad prediction. stay with us. last week, the u.s. supreme
last week, the u.s. supreme court wrapped up its term for this year by upholding the president's muslim band and delivering a huge blow to unions in this country and one final kick in the teeth, the announcement supreme court justice kennedy is retiring so president trump can pick his replacement because that's what he wants to be his legacy despite his placement on this court, his ideology line, it is one of the picks that could dramatically change the courts and dramatically change american policy and american law and american life for a very very long time.
a lot about the trump era and era politics, a lot of what is happening in this presidency really has never happened before. it's interesting. when it comes to this supreme court vacancy and this time at a heightened time in american politics right before a critical election, turns out this is something we have lived through before. this is not unprecedented. when it has happened before, there are a ton of almost erie parallels to the way it's happening right now. i should also tell you from the other time this happened we at least have the benefit of knowing how it all worked out that time. that may be helpful for figuring out what the best way forward is on it this time now that the court looms like a spector over this year's midterm elections.
if yor crohn's symptoms are holding you back, and your current treatment hasn't worked well enough, it may be time for a change. ask your doctor about entyvio, the only biologic developed and approved just for uc and crohn's. entyvio works at the site of inflammation in the gi tract and is clinically proven to help many patients achieve both symptom relief and remission. infusion and serious allergic reactions can happen during or after treatment. entyvio may increase risk of infection, which can be serious. pml, a rare, serious, potentially fatal brain infection caused by a virus may be possible. this condition has not been reported with entyvio. tell your doctor if you have an infection, experience frequent infections or have flu-like symptoms or sores. liver problems can occur with entyvio. if your uc or crohn's treatment isn't working for you,
ask your gastroenterologist about entyvio. entyvio. relief and remission within reach. i knew at that exact moment, whatever it takes, wherever i have to go...i'm beating this. my main focus was to find a team of doctors that work together. when a patient comes to ctca, they're meeting a team of physicians that specialize in the management of cancer. breast cancer treatment is continuing to evolve. and i would say that ctca is definitely on the cusp of those changes. patients can be overwhelmed ... we really focus on taking the time with each individual patient so they can choose the treatment appropriate for them. the care that ctca brings is the kind of care i've wanted for my patients. being able to spend time with them, have a whole team to look after them is fantastic. i empower women with choices. it's not just picking a surgeon. it's picking the care team, and feeling secure where you are. surround yourself with the team of breast cancer experts
at cancer treatment centers of america. visit cancercenter.com/breast 1968 was one of the rare presidential elections in modern american history in which a third party candidate actually did all right. segregationist former alabama governor george wallace basically swept the south in 1968 as a candidate for the american independent party. he won five states. a populist and straight-up racist segregationist platform. during that campaign, george wallace reserved for a particular target of his wrath the united states supreme court. the court then was led by chief justice earl warren, the supreme court had ended legal racial segregation in the united states.
it had established miranda rights so criminal suspects were made aware of their rights immediately upon arrest. the warren court made it the law of the land that defendants have the right to legal counsel. imagine the horror. george wallace hated it all. >> the supreme court of our country has handcuffed the police. they have rendered decisions today that are absolutely ludicrous and asinine, turning people loose everyday to self-proven confessed murders of five or more people, you read about it. when they turn somebody loose a self-professed murderer of five or more people, intellectuals tell us, he's really not to blame, society is to blame because his papa didn't carry him to see the los angeles plays when he was a little boy and he's mad with folks. one reason we've had a break down of law enforcement has been the supreme court of the united
states has, by reflection upon the integrity and morality of the police of this country made it impossible to convict a criminal, made it impossible to arrest one and today in the cities of our nation you cannot walk the streets of public parks without fear of physical molestation because if you arrest someone today they try the policeman on monday instead of the criminal. >> george wallace did not win the presidential election in 1968. he did all right better than you might think. five states. he did well enough in '68 he scared the republicans he might take so many of their voters he would cost them their election. with his rhetoric on the supreme court in particular he pushed the republican nominee much further to the right. the republican nominee was richard nixon, who believe it or not started off as a california moderate and even a liberal by california standards but soon enough richard nixon was on the campaign trail doing his best george wallace talking about the forgotten americans, non-shouters, the non-demonstrators, not racists or sick that plagues the land.
he called them the real voice of america and pitched himself as the law and order candidate and went hard right to the supreme court in particular and said he would appoint supreme court justices to overturn the recent rulings from the warren court about miranda rights and the rest of them and restore the country to a system of law and order with conservative judges. that was part of nixon's southern strategy, part of his plan to peel off george wallace's supporters to make them his own. chief justice earl warren saw what was happening. he saw richard nixon, a front-runner for the presidency was threatening to roll back everything the warren court accomplished, it was becoming a big campaign issue and nixon was going hard right on that issue. he saw it coming. in june, 1968, a few days after
bobby kennedy had been assassinated. chief warren johnson told the president he was going to retire as soon as possible, as soon as a successor would be named. he did not want to run the risk it might be richard nixon to win the election and thereby get the opportunity to replace him on the supreme court. he said he was out. at 68, lyndon johnson suddenly has the opportunity to choose a supreme court justice a few months before the presidential election. he wasn't going to get to pick not just any justice, he would get to pick a chief justice. johnson decided to elevate somebody already on the bench, already on the supreme court as an associate justice. it was a complete disaster. abe fortis had been on the supreme court a couple years, a friend of president johnson. when he said he wanted to elevate him from from a regular seat to the chief justice,
republicans did a slow walk and when the nomination took place, senators learned not only had the justice been hanging around the white house for meetings and pressuring certain senators who opposed the vietnam wall something they're not supposed to involve themselves in, they learned fortas had been receiving money teaching a court, moonlighting paying him a stipend worth 40% of his salary on the court. soon, democrats started taking back their support one by one and ultimately fortis had to withdraw from the justice nomination and went back to being a regular justice on the court and that meant president johnson had to withdraw the nomination he had made to replace fortis on the assumption
fortis would be moving up to chief. president johnson, outgoing president lyndon johnson went from having two chances to change up the supreme court to name two new justices, he went from two chances to no chances. the abe fortis nomination was a bust and political disaster. they tried to game the whole thing and blew it. sure enough, nixon did in fact win the 1968 administration and because of that failure by the johnson nomination to successfully nominate a new chief justice to the bench so nixon wouldn't get to, nixon ultimately got to and able to follow-through on his campaign promise to appoint conservative judges who pledged to dismantle the legacy of the warren court. by the time nixon came into office so much came out about fortis, he had to leave the court. so in 1969 he got to pick his replacement and got to replace earl warren as chief who resigned and it would take effect as soon as he had a
successor. nixon got to pick a successor. with that, richard nixon took the liberal earl warren court and made it shift abruptly right almost overnight all because the effort to try to head that off in 1968 got botched so badly. lbj screwed it up and george wallace, in a way, got his wish. there is a lot about the trump era in american politics and republican politics totally unprecedented. the concern about the supreme court now and what called happen next. the controversy at fight over the newly vacated court seat the new background for midterm elections, this is not a trump unprecedented things. this is the sort of thing that happened before, we lived through this before, warts and all. this is one of those things that happens again 50 years later.
congresswoman jerry nadler. quote, it has been brought to my attention you have been proactively seeking meetings with caucus colleagues to discuss the top house position on the judiciary committee. and that you're asserting i would not be a candidate for this slot if it were vacant. i request you refrain from characterizing my intentions. politico.com obtained that letter and the way they understand it, that the congresswoman was basically arguing the top democratic seat on that committee shouldn't be handed out on the basis of seniority even though she was only the third most senior member of that committee she was arguing she should be in contention for that top job if it opened up. at the time she wrote this letter, the top ranking position on the committee was not open, held by long time, long long
time congressman, john conyers. at the time of that letter, it would be months still before john conyers would announce his resignation in the wake of a whole bunch of sexual misconduct allegations against him. even before john conyers got ousted from that top job on the committee it was clear there was something unusual going on inside the democratic party on that committee. democrats were fighting among themselves about the process and who would get the top job on that particular committee. they were fighting about it even while conyers was still there. that's in part because of what that particular committee does. in addition to overseeing law enforcement agencies and considering legislation related to the judicial system, that committee, house judiciary committee is also where they handle impeachments.
impeachments of all kinds, just in case. just in case those circumstances ever arise in congress, it's the judiciary committee that handles impeachments of judges and cabinet officials and if there was an impeachment honestly impeachment is a thing that might conceivably come up depending -- if it did, the democratic led house judiciary committee -- the far and advance fight who would be at the top.
the committee is run by the republicans but depending on what happens this fall, that may change. now, he should get the gig because of his quote "demonstrated leadership on impeachment in the '90s." she has not just served on the proceedings, she's been on the committee staff during president nixon's impeachment hearings. jerry nadler, the number two democrat after conyers and in the end, nadler won that fight. he got the ranking member position, which means he'll be the position to win the chairman if democrats want. as democrats continue to make head way across elections across the country, they are divided
about whether they should even talk about the "i" word in public. whether or not they are talking about it in public, it is clear it is a live issue of democratic politics. it is animating and heating congressional fights among house democrats who otherwise kind of liked each other and sending everybody back in the history book on lessons on how to do impeachment rights if it eventually comes to that. when it come to the politics of the "i," there are definitely recent history of how you can screw it up. >> you were there 20 years ago when your party decided to push impeachment against bill clinton in a midterm year. the election had a distinction being the rare midterms where
the white house party actually gained seats. was impeachment the reason democrats gained seats? >> i don't think there is any questions about it. was that a case of the party base and the movement basis calling the shot and party leaders are responding. this is what our people want and we need to do this. >> if you look at initial votes republicans and nobody knew about this. there is a lot of nervousness in politicians when something gets thrown up. let's go ahead and go with investigation. they did not know how clinton would handle it. at the end of the day, he turned it on republicans and turning it into a democratic gain. a lot of republicans despise clinton and when this scandal coming out with monica lewinsky, they could not help themselves.
cable news was not a big factor as it is today. talk radio certainly fuels it. you have a rabbit republican base calling for this. for those in the swing districts, it was not quite clear cut. guys, do you know what we are getting into here? let's take a look at the facts. we all take a deep breath before he ended up voting on it. >> were you sitting there saying we are going to pay for it in a month. >> republican leadership going back to their meetings, yeah, let's get the guy and they reacted basically saying this is a turn out base. not recognizing what -- that's exactly what happened in this cases. democrats became aroused and the president, not necessarily what he did but the way the republicans handled it.
we'll look at this and do investigation, that was the republicans' message in the end. if we get elected, we'll impeach this guy. >> joining us now, once again is the great steve cornacki who did that interview with congressman tom davis, fascinating. >> yeah, it was. so he's describing the internal dynamics of the republican caucus. he's like yeah, we were wrong and we thought it is going to help us. after they get political blow back and actually lose seats after their impeachment against clinton, what happens to the republicans that were saying this is our ticket to victory and this is how we are going to ride to new political heights. >> this is the story of the end of newt gingrich's political career. he was the house speaker and after bill clinton admitted to the affair in the summer of 1998 and newt gingrich predicted this is going to result of a gain of
40 seats in the republican's house. he had a public speech where he said that, august or july of 1998, he talked about 40 seats from this. he told congress i think i found impeachable offenses. republicans and a few democrats vote in the house and open a formal impeachment inquiry. republicans of the rare exceptions of all the history lost seats in the midterm election. days later, newt gingrich was decomposed as the speaker resigned from congress and that was it for his phase of the career. >> how, he's the husband of the vatican ambassador. that's totally normal. steve cornacki, this is a lot of fun. much appreciated. >> yeah. >> more to talk about, stay with us. we'll be right back.
it is just starting. expect for it to accelerate as we move on through the year. "last word" starts right now. its pace moving through the year. lawrence o'donnell starts right now. trying to thaw icy relations with russia. a group of seven lawmakers visit moscow ahead of president trump's meeting with vladimir putin. it comes as the senate intel committee released the report, reaffirming the intelligence community's assessment putin tried to help trump win in 2016. plus, with days to go until his self-imposed deadline, president trump is narrowing his list of potential supreme court candidates. and a threat of heavy rain is forcing rescue teams to consider different ways to get 12 trapped boys and their soccer coach out of a flooded cave in thailand. ♪