tv The Rachel Maddow Show MSNBC November 1, 2018 9:00pm-10:00pm PDT
happy to have you with us. if you are sensing a little tension, a little drama, little -- of excitement about the elections, we're just about five days out now from election day. if you get the sense things are a little twang, a little tense right now, closely thought in terms of how the elections are going to be decided, that is not just you projecting from your own internal levels of anxiety and stress. what you are sensing is a true thing that is measurable in the world. never more so than it is measurable tonight. look at this. this is a new poll just released tonight in one of the most fascinating and important races that is going to happen in the country. this is the georgia governor's race between republican secretary of state ultra
conservative republican brian kemp and the former democratic leader of the state legislature in georgia, stacey abrams. all right. new poll from the atlanta journal constitution. as you see in the headline, it says they are dead locked. that's not hyperbole. look, quote. the poll conducted by the university of georgia school of public and international affairs has stacey abrams at 46.9% and brian kemp at 46.7%. that is incredible. five days out in a statewide race, five days out from the election, to be separated by 0.2 percentage points. now, the wild card there in that georgia race is that if neither of these candidates gets over 50% of the vote, brian kemp and stacey abrams will have to go to a runoff in december. so, if neither one of them hits 50, we will not know who georgia's governor is going to be until next month. there is a libertarian candidate who is running in georgia as
well. he has as much a chance of winning the governorship in georgia as i have at winning miss america and the lottery and a tony award all tonight. tada! with a race this close, with a tiny pointless sliver of a vote that libertarian seems to be pulling in, him pulling off that number of votes, as unimportant as that will be for his future, it will result in neither brian kemp nor stacey abrams being able to get over 50% to win that race next week. not when they're both tied at between 46.7 and 46.9%. but it's not just there. there's a new cnn poll out tonight in the u.s. senate race in florida. democratic incumbent senator bill nelson running against the incumbent governor rick scott. that race tonight in florida also exactly tied, 46% each. we also just got new fox news polls on the senate race in arizona. republican martha mcsally
running against democrat kiersten cinema. that race is also tied at 46% each. another fox news poll also shows a tie in the missouri senate race between democratic incumbent senator claire mccaskill and missouri's republican attorney general josh hawley. they are both tied at 45%. this is the best one of all of them. this one is out of wisconsin. this is marquette. he is having a tough time holding onto his seat running against tony evers. in that wigs which is governor's race, it not only shows a tie between scott walker and tony evers, not only shows them with each having 47% of the vote. that marquette university poll literally found the exact same number of humans picking scott
evers and scott walker. it is not a statistical tie, not a margin of error. the exact same number of human respondents in that poll picked tony evers as picked scott walker. man. lest you think your vote does not count this year, lest you think you might not bother -- i don't care where you're voting -- there are so many important, really interesting races all over the country. congressional races, statewide races, senate races. there are so many of them we see polling like this where it's not just close. it is absolutely dead even. in that case of that wisconsin governor's race, it's literally tied with the exact same number of human beings on each side. and in an environment like that, that means every single individual vote has a chance of being very exciting because it could be decisive. and every race is different, and every race turns on the strengths and weaknesses of each candidate and on the issues on which the candidates are
fighting it out and the local circumstances in which the elections are happening. i know every race is local. but when the contest overall appears to be as close as it is this year between the two parties, right? we see that most strikingly at the national level with a question of who will control the house of representatives. will the republicans continue to hold it or will the democrats hold it. that has huge implications in washington for the next couple years of the trump administration, let alone policy. but even bigger picture than that, right? when the two parties are fighting this hard, this closely over this many battle grounds, i think it becomes almost irresistible for the party controlling the white house to try to give the elections overall some sort of big national shove, to try to change the weather in their own favor, to change the political climate in this country that somehow redounds in the direction of the
president's party. and when it comes to this white house and this president, the shove that president trump has tried on for this election, for this year is remarkably unsubtle. this ad, apparently created by the white house or maybe the trump campaign, but certainly circulated by the president, it literally argues that democrats are rioting violent ma rauding criminal mobs that will hunt you down, beat you bloody, destroy the city and burn its wreckage. that was followed up by the president now circulating a new ad that overtly and literally blames democrats for a sinister murderer of police officers who brads his beard hair. the ad makes the case that democrats are in favor of murdering police officers and specifically they're in favor of this guy murdering police officers. the ad says it is outrageous what the democrats are doing to our country, literally says, quote, democrats let him stay.
actually, after being deported during the clinton administration, that is actually a guy who was allowed back to stay in the country by the george w. bush administration. apparently that's close enough to democrats to make the grade when it comes to the expected veracity of presidential statements in the trump white house. these images are so scary and terrible, right, you can't let the truth of them get in the way of the story they are trying to tell in the last few days before the election, to try to tore identify low-information voters to not vote at all, or for voting for the party they think will defend the white race from the mongrel hoards donald trump says are coming to punch you in the face. i realize that's a little on the nose, but i feel like if this is the level of subtlety they want to operate at in this election, meet them where they are and talk bluntly about what they are doing here. but nobody is going to go to the polls, either early voting this week and this weekend or on election day on tuesday.
nobody is going to the polls to get a chance to vote yes or no on donald trump. he won't be on the ballot, right? it's other republican names all around the country that people have to vote on. state legislative candidates, statewide candidates, senate candidates, gubernatorial candidates, those are the people -- those are the republicans who are going to have to decide whether they want to position themselves to benefit from this final shove that is coming from the white house before this year's elections, from this propaganda effort that is designed to shape the electorate in a way that will hopefully help republicans. and i understand why the white house is trying to do this. but there are problems for them with this strategy. i mean, for example, no matter how much they're trying to change the conversation away from it, today was another day of funerals in pittsburgh for three more of the victims of the deadliest attack on the american jewish community ever committed on u.s. soil. the suspect in this weekend's
massacre and the pittsburgh synagogue pled not guilty to 44 felony counts is pleading not guilty. he could have pled guilty, come to a plea agreement, specifically in an effort to try to avoid the death penalty. but he's pleading not guilty and he told the judge today he wants a jury trial. we will see how that works out for him in the court system. presumably, at that jury trial, he's thinking at this point that he'll be able to mount what all of these guys fantasize about when they see themselves as justified righteous killers defending the white race, presumably he will want to use his jury trial to make a public argument in court that he thinks will per squsuade the country i rising up for a race war. make his public argument for why his murder of these mostly elderly jews in pittsburgh was necessary and even patriotic, right? he'll presumably want to make that public case before the jury. that's what these guys always want to do.
and we know that he wants to make that argument publicly because he made that argument at length over a period of weeks and months online before he finally went ahead and loaded his guns and did it. the suspect in the pittsburgh massacre waxed ineloquent and all caps for months, in age-old klan and skin head style, the jews are out to destroy white people by promoting immigration so as to dilute the white race, dilute white racial purity, to undermine white racial majorities, weaken the country by making it less white. that's the white nationalist connection, right? that's the connection they draw between the be afraid of the terrible terrifying diseased immigrant hoards coming in, and the jews are probably paying for it argument. those are two halves of the same argument. the racial purity people, the white nationalist people, they have always connected those two things. the immigrant hoards are coming
here to dilute our racial purity and undermine white power in america, and the jews are arranging it because the jews are out to destroy the white race. that's their argument and it has been as far back as you can count. that's why the pittsburgh massacre suspect was ranting about the caravan of migrants coming up from central america and also simultaneously ranting about the need to kill the jews to stop that invasion he was so afraid of. i mean, that was his argument for why he said he had to do it. he pled not guilty in court today. but that is what he's already pled online as his justification for this past weekend's massacre. he had to do it because the united states was being invaded, invaded by these immigrants and refugees, right now, so he had to act you are gently. -- urgently. that's the massacre suspect that pled not guilty in court this morning. and then this was the president's speech acting out his arguments this afternoon.
>> at this very moment, large, well organized caravans of migrants are marching toward our southern border. some people call it an invasion. it's like an invasion. >> even if there had not just been the worst massacre of american jews on u.s. soil by an alleged killer who decried the invasion and made this exact same argument just days ago before he grabbed his guns and started shooting, even if that hadn't just happened, republicans might still be having a hard time deciding if they, too, are going to go with this as the last big public argument that we're going to have before this year's election. the country is in a national emergency because we're being invaded? i mean, the president certainly believes this is a great political move for himself and his party. but there are already signs that this sort of thing isn't going to work everywhere. it's actually starting to get hard to see where it's going to work. i mean, in the great state of
iowa, the governor's race right now is a really interesting one. it's one that hasn't been a lot of poll, not a lot of attention. fivethirtyeight lists the governor's race as likely democrat in iowa. that's with a republican incumbent trying to hold onto that seat. one of the late emerging issues this that iowa governor's race is the republican incumbent governor kim reynolds, she picked as her statewide co-chair for her campaign, congressman steve king. congressman steve king has a national profile because he had these virulent anti-immigrant politics and known for his raw unapologetic racist appeals to immigrants and retweets of neo-nazis. he was known for all of that before trump made it cool in the republican party. after congressman king went so far as to take a trip to austria this summer, literally to meet with a neo-nazi political party, king's own district in iowa, even though they've been electing him and reelecting him
for years, and he's never exactly hid this light under a bushel, they're finally shuddering a little bit about the prospect of reelecting him one more time. his hometown paper which supported him in the past, his hometown paper has now abandoned him. it doesn't hurt that the democrat running against steve king appears to not have an enemy in the world and seems to be run exactly the kind of race you need to run in that district to beat a guy like steve king. his race and immigrant stuff have fed up his constituents in iowa enough his own race is an interesting new question. and his involvement in the republican governor's campaign itself is becoming enough of a controversy for her that it may help her lose that governor seat. it may help elect democrat fred hubble, governor of iowa, tuesday night. for other republicans who don't
want a reputation like steve king's, for other republicans, particularly those in tight races who are trying to steer clear of the steve king/donald trump effect at this late date, a lot of them have been trying to avoid this race and violence and anti-immigrant democragogue as much as they can. they try ton comment about it when they are confronted with it. they pretend it's not happening. that's got nothing to do with me. i'm focusing on local issues. please don't ask a follow-up. a lot of them have been trying to run, instead, on things like health care which we've been covering the last few weeks now. that, of course, has its own awkwardness for republican candidates. after all these years the republican party as a unified front running vituperatively against obamacare and everything it stood for and did. this year all the republicans that are up for reelection this year, they're running like they're the biggest champions
for obamacare. vote for me. i'll make sure obamacare -- i mean, obamacare made it a new rule insurance companies can't deny you a policy, can't say no to you for getting covered. they can't charge you more for getting covered if you have a preexisting condition, right? all these republicans are now trying to say that was awesome. we have to make sure that doesn't go away. boy, i sure love that. i can be counted on to fight for you for that. after all these years they have been fighting to get rid of that and every other element of obamacare. president obama himself has been out on the campaign trail stumping for democratic candidates in this election. he seems specifically fed up about that. here's former president obama a few days ago in wisconsin talking about wisconsin republican governor scott walker trying to run for reelection this year as if he's obamacare's biggest champion. >> your governor has been running an ad during election time saying he is going to protect preexisting conditions
when he is literally doing the opposite. that is some kind of gall. that is, that is some kind of hutzpah. but let's also call it what it is. it is a lie. [ cheers and applause ] >> as republicans try to run away from trump and his violence and race closing argument, and they try to find other policy issues to run on instead, health care isn't going to work for republican candidates for a bunch of different reasons. i mean, one of them is their record. republican party's unified, unanimous record, fighting everything in the affordable care act, including insurance companies having to cover you if you got a preexisting condition. they're all trying to run on that now. but it is too blatant a reverse. it's too blatant a lie to get away with. anywhere in the country, especially in a year when health care is more important to voters than any other issue that's
helping them decide between the candidates and their local race. there is also this problem. 20 republican-led states, including scott walker's wisconsin, right now are suing in federal courts to eliminate coverage for preexisting conditions. as established by obamacare. they're suing to eradicate every vestige of obamacare, even arguing specifically in their lawsuit the rule that says preexisting conditions has to be covered, that must die. that's a lawsuit from 20 republican-led states. that lawsuit has actually made its way through the courts now, and a ruling on that case is due any second, any day. i mean, the republican-led states are suing to eliminate preexisting conditions. all of these republican candidates, including republican governors from those states that are suing for that, are saying, i'm really for coverage for preexisting conditions. but the court's ruling on that could come any day now, including between now and
election day on tuesday. so that's a problem for them. but even worse for republicans who are trying to change the conversation to health care today, today, november 1st, was the first day that new rules established by the trump administration, unilaterally, today if the first day those new rules went into effect. and as of today for the first time -- actually, i'll quote "the wall street journal" here. quote, this is the first open enrollment period under a trump administration change under which plans, health insurance plans, can now deny coverage to people with preexisting conditions. under obamacare we got this new rule in the country that tells health insurance companies you can't deny people coverage, because they have asthma or high blood pressure, they've had a lump removed from the breast or any other preexisting condition. we got that under obamacare. republicans in 20 states with support from the justice department are suing to get rid of that protection. and today for the first time,
you can buy cruddy health insurance that will not cover you if you have a preexisting condition. and you can buy that as of today for the first time since obamacare passed because of a rules change that was pushed through unilaterally by the trump administration that has gone into effect today, literally five days before election day. all right. and here's one last problem. as other options of other policies to talk about, like health care, as those things get basically closed off to republicans for these last five days, as we head toward election day, as the president double ands triples and quadruples down to make this about terrible immigrants and race and the border, there is another problem for republican candidates right now, and we're going to speak in just a moment with a well-connected military reporter from news week magazine about the military deployment, the active duty troop deployment which just started today, which trump ordered to the u.s. border in response to that caravan of
central american migrants he is trying to make so terrifying, that he's trying to make the center piece of the election. caravan is more than 800 miles away from the nearest place they could cross the u.s. border if they got there. they're more than 2000 miles away from the place they're considered to cross the border if they tried to. the president announced this week there would be initially 5,000 active duty u.s. troops rushed to the border in response to the threat of this heir a van. then it became 9,000 troops. now they're saying it is 15,000 troops. 15,000 active duty u.s. servicemen and women. democrats in the armed service committees in the house and senate have now written letters to the white house asking about what's the cost of this deployment, how long is this thing going to laviolette? and, of course, we are all used to not just increased demagoguery, but also blatant political stunts before election day. i know that.
it is something different. it is a different order of magnitude. when you're talking about thousands of active duty u.s. soldiers, more u.s. soldiers than are serving right now in the war in afghanistan. if 15,000 active duty u.s. troops at, what, round up to inif inifi infinite costs, they're sent to the border specifically because the president thinks that's good messaging, that's not your run of the mill stunt. that is something that might even annoy the military itself. and so here's the last point. two military sources have gone to the press and have provided to news week magazine actual military planning documents for trump's preelection border deployment. these documents just published
by news week malg seen show the unvarnished military assessment that was not to be made public, what the military believes it is being sent to the border to confront. these documents obtained by news week magazine. we're going to talk to the reporter from the story in just a moment. but here's the reason they were leaked in the first place. this is the military intelligence assessment of the threat that the president is hyping so much as justifying this deployment. this is what this document says. according to the military in this internal document. quote, based on historic trends, it is assessed that only a small percentage of the migrants will likely reach the border. see over here in military documents love acronyms. acronym is mlcoa, most likely course of action, mlcoa. this is the most likely koirsco of action. this is what the military decides. caravan dwindle as it nears the
u.s. no terrorist infiltration. so, this is a document that was not supposed to be released to the public. it's unclassified, but it's labeled for official use only and law enforcement sensitive. but it's now been leaked, and this shows us what the military thinks about the situation for which they are being sent in numbers larger than the ach began stan deployment ahead of the election on the president's orders. the reason this document is now public, we don't know because we can't get in the heads of the sources. it would seem to indicate there are people in the military who want it to be known that this deployment of u.s. troops to the border right before the election might just be for a political reason, to help the president's political party and not for a real military reason. we're going to have more on this document with the reporter who broke this story next.
attractions, and experiences in destinations around the world! like new orleans! from cooking classes, to airboat tours,, tripadvisor makes it easy to find and book amazing things to do. and you can cancel most bookings up to 24 hours in advance for a full refund. so your whole trip... will be smooth sailing!
called the minute men. for them today's announcement is too little too late. on monday, a thousand minute men, some armed, will begin patrolling a 23-mile stretch of arizona's border, claiming border patrol agents need help. >> are we going out looking for a fire fight? absolutely not. do we have a right to be there? yes. that's the united states territory. >> reporter: the border patrol fear some of the minutemen are neither trained nor prepared to encounter illegal immigrants senator smugglers. >> if you bring untrained civilians to an area they don't know, the likelihood of them getting into a serious violent incident is very high. >> ah, the civilian fake border patrol. this comes up and around every few years. people who have been whipped up into a frenzy, into believing that the border is being overrun, and he can help. but the border patrol desperately needs is their untrained civilian individuvigi
fake uniform help. it's not helpful. the people who work on the border for u.s. law enforcement never think it's helpful. so, tonight we're reporting on these leaked documents from the u.s. military that have ended up getting published in news week magazine. the top line result here is that in terms of this deployment that the president has ordered of u.s. active duty troops to the border right ahead of the election, the military assessment about the threat they're going there to stop, this migrant caravan coming up from central america, military's assessment about that sz an actual threat is only a small percentage of those migrants part of the caravan will end up ever reaching the border. here's what the military assesses as the most likely course of action for that caravan. "caravan dwindles as it nears us u, no criminal exploitation and no terrorist infestation."
no terrorist problem, not a problem of any people overall. they're 800 to 2000 miles away depending which route they take. so, active duty troops are being sent there in huge numbers by the president's order right before the election. he's making as big a show out of it as possible, speech at the white house and everything. now we know the military itself assesses the situation there as nowhere near the kind of terrible immediate existential threat the president is preaching to the country as supposedly justifying this deployment. it's interesting. with this document, james la portis reporting, we can see the military is not at all worried about. here's the neat thing about this document, though. in this document we can see what the military is most worried about, with this deployment, with this just in time for the election troop dee employment. what the military, according to these documents, leaked documents, what the military is
most actually worried about are americans who show up to play militia and fake patrol the border themselves. they say, among the events of interest, they need to be concerned about are, quote, an estimated 200 unregulated armed militia members currently operating along the southern border. for one thing, the pentagon says based on their past experience with these vigilante anti-immigrant militia guys, one of the problems they know from them from past experience, they steal -- look at this, under events of interest. quote, reported incidents of unregulated militia stealing national guard equipment during deployments. so, okay, active duty troops, if you or somebody in your family is going to be part of this 15,000-troop deployment to the border just in time for the election, you already know, and now we know thanks to these documents, that the military assesses no credible threat of that caravan overwhelming the border.
but the military does want you to keep your eyes peeled for the armed militia vigilante guys in the caravan who might be looming in the area and trying to steal your stuff. joining us is james la portis, a former infantry man himself. it's good to have you with us tonight. congratulations on the scoop. >> thank you for having me. >> can you tell us, both from this document that you obtained from your sources, but also with your own military background -- i understand you have military intelligence background as well -- what kind of document is this that you have obtained? what would this be used for? and also how secret is this kind of document? >> so, in terms of how secret this document is, it is an unclassified document. it is for official use only. it does have a slightly higher classification than for official use only because of the law enforcement sensitivity. but in terms of the intelligence assessment, i mean, from my
limited experience in the intelligence community, you would see this in what we call intelligence preparation of the battle field. i don't want to caveat battle field is not what i'm calling the southern border. usually you would see this, it is an assessment of, just like you said, the most likely course of action, the most dangerous course of action, but based on historical trends, what the intelligence community predicts will happen. >> i'm not going to ask you to talk about your sources. i'm not pressuring you about that. i don't need you to explain exactly how you got this document, which you say is law enforcement, it's not for public scrutiny. can you tell me why this document was leaked? why somebody wanted a reporter such as yourself to have access to this information? >> well, my sources and both other people i just talked to today in terms of sort of what is the overall feeling in the
pentagon, they believe there tends to be an agreement on two things. one, that it's sort of a waste of time, and there is really not the evidence to support sending this many troops down there. i mean, it really comes from a standpoint of how much money this is going to cost the taxpayers. but in terms of why the documents were leaked, it's really to show that, that the military is -- from my source's opinion and people in the pentagon, they believe -- a lot of them, but not all of them. a lot of them believe this is politically motivated. they're sending 15,000 troops to respond to basically 1400 people that may or may not show up at the border. >> and even if they do, it's not something you have to rush people there right before the election if this is politically motivated. i just want to underscore one thing you said there. not just in terms of the sources
from whom you obtained this document, but you also described sort of pentagon sources more broadly, that you're hearing -- make sure i got this right. you're hearing that within the pentagon there are definitely voices who are upset about this deployment, who are suggesting that it's wasteful and that it is motivated for political reasons and that it is not warranted by the actual conditions on the ground. do you think that is something for which we are going to start to hear a sort of dissent channel voice from the pentagon or will we see more documents leaked or more people will actually talk about what their concerns are with this deployment? >> possibly. i mean the sources i talked to today sort of paint the pentagon into three different groups. one group is a dissenting opinion from what this document shows. they are hard liners. they believe in a crackdown on
illegal immigration and they support what's actually going on. that is not -- from what i'm hearing, is not the majority view. there is a second group that they are pure military. they are going to follow the orders of the president, just regardless of political ideology. they're going to follow the orders, but they really come at this problem in terms of the money situation, like, you know, how much is this going to cost. and then the third group is really how is this going to overall affect military readiness, that it's a waste of money. even the troop level response coming down to the command authority doesn't equate with the most likely course of action. like you said, they're assessing the migrants are to dwindle down to the smallest group 20% make it to the border. if you're taking the 7,000 which
is assessed in that document, 20% of 7,000 is about 1400 people. so, it just seems to them irrational to exceptsend a forc 15,000 which is more nan what we have in afghanistan now, which is a 17-year war, to the border to respond to about 1400 people. >> james la porta, investigative journalist of news week and infantry man himself. thank you for sharing this scoop with us. i think this is an important story. thanks. >> thank you for having me. >> all right, we have much more to come tonight. do stay with us. doug, doug!
douglas! we're running dangerously low on beans. people love your beans, doug. they love 'em. doooooooooug! you want to go sell some tacos? progressive knows small business makes big demands. doug, where do we get a replacement chili pepper bulb? so we'll design the insurance solution that fits your business. it's a very niche bulb. it's a specialty bulb.
"look what she's accomplished... she authored the ban on assault weapons... pushed the desert protection act through congress, and steered billions of federal dollars to california projects such as subway construction and wildfire restoration." "she... played an important role in fighting off ...trump's efforts to kill the affordable care act." california news papers endorse dianne feinstein for us senate. california values senator dianne feinstein recently, more than $20 million has been spent in the race for superintendent of public instruction to attack my friend tony thurmond's record. well, i've worked with tony, and no one is more qualified to lead our state's schools. that's why tony thurmond is the only candidate endorsed by classroom teachers and the california democratic party. because tony will stand up to the donald trump-betsy devos agenda and has always protected our local public schools. join me in voting for tony thurmond. let's put our kids first.
so, we have recently been following this sort of dire voting rights situation in north dakota where there is one of the most important and closely fought senate races in the country, and where the republican-led government in that state decided to effectively block the ability of most native americans in that state to vote in this election. when they made it a requirement to vote this year, they got to have a residential street address on your i.d. native americans who live on rural reservations in north dakota don't have residential street addresses on the reservations, and so they don't have that on their i.d.s and so this has just been a heck of a fight in north dakota. house to house, tribe to tribe, and now in court. we're going to have an update on that coming up in just a moment. we've also got an update on kansas as well where we've been following the voting rights disaster in majority hispanic dodge city, kansas. we have both of those updates coming up for you next.
at&t provides edge-to-edge intelligence, covering virtually every part of your finance business. and so if someone tries to breach your firewall in london & you start to panic... don't. because your cto says we've got allies on the outside... ...& security algorithms on the inside... ...& that way you can focus on expanding into eastern europe... ...& that makes the branch managers happy & yes, that's the branch managers happy. at&t provides edge-to-edge intelligence. it can do so much for your business, the list goes on and on. that's the power of &. & when this happens you'll know how to quickly react...
today dodge city went to court. this is the case we talked about last night on the show. involves 18-year-old first-time voter alejandro lopez as the named plaintiff in a lawsuit over the polling place that used to be in dodge city, kansas. the local republican county clerk says that she moved dodge city's lone polling place completely out of the city this year because of what she says is construction that blocks this site. we took pictures of this week where the construction doesn't actually seem to be blocking anybody's way, let alone clear access to the great big parking lot right in the center of town. nevertheless, citing this terribly intrusive construction we couldn't see, she moved dodge city's polling place. it had been right there in the center of town. she moved it this year to a new location way outside the city limits, moon scape place where there are no sidewalks, nearest bus stop is a mile away. mostly hispanic dodge city can
make the trek out there if they want to vote this year. good luck. got a car? after trying for weeks to get some kind of fix for this from the republican county clerk, the aclu in kansas decided to sue the clerk in federal court. that hearing was today. a bunch muof people testified. we sent the producer there this week. there really is no construction happening on that old site in the center of town even though the clerk says construction is why that site couldn't be used. the hearing today lasted nearly three hours. and now tonight, within the last hour, the federal judge in that case has issued a ruling on the situation in dodge city. the court in kansas just minutes ago denied the aclu's request for a second polling place to be in town. the judge cited the election being just days away writing, quote, for the court to insert itself on the eve of the election would create more voter confusion than it might cure. the aclu itself it will not
appeal a decision like this so close to the election. we are awaiting comment from them as well as our new friend alejandro, first time voter who lent his name to this case. welcome to voting in 2018, alejandro. i hope you get a ride. this disconnect we have seen play out in dodge city between the people w.h.o. make these decisions about how people vote and the people who have to live with those decisions, we are seeing that play out on an even larger and more dramatic scale in north dakota where there are thousands of native american voters who don't have the kind of i.d. the state newly requires in order to vote. after democratic u.s. senator heidi heitkamp won her senate seat in 2012 in a squeaker thanks in large part to her strong support from native american voters in her state, north dakota's republican-led state government decided they would newly require i.d. that shows a voter's physical street address. many native americans in rural north dakota don't have that because many of them live on
rural reservations where the reservations don't assign residential street addresses. as nbc news reported on the ground this week, the tribes have been making a fairly desperate last-ditch effort to try to get new addresses to every tribal voter to try to generate addresses, and then get that address printed on an i.d. and get that i.d. into every voter's hands so they can all vote. nbc reports that they're up to about 1300 people with new qualifying i.d.s. that leaves at least 3700 to go and five days to get there. north dakota is a state where a few thousand votes, few hundred votes can mean the difference between getting elected and not. who gets elected in this senate seat this year makes the difference to which party controls the u.s. senate. native american groups say that even working around the clock, even printing out new i.d.s so fast, one of their machines overheated and started
to melt the i.d. ts. they say they will be hard-pressed to get everyone. running out of time. they sued in court yesterday saying the state's voter i.d. law is disenfranchising native american votes. they asked the court to intervene on an emergency basis. today the judge ruled on that and said, no, sorry, it's too late. we're too close to the election. the judge told this north dakota tribe that their testimony had given the court, quote, great cause for concern, but he also told them fa if he were to intervene it would, quote, create as much confusion as it would alleviate. so, what happens now? all right, what happens now particularly in north dakota with thousands of native american voters who are being told they cannot vote unless they get something they have never needed to show in order to vote before, and they have never had in their lives? they have never had in generations. and they say they can't get those things generated and assigned and printed and distributed by any stretch of
the imagination between now and election day. it just can't be done. the state has made it so that native americans will not be allowed to vote, and now the court says can't do anything. what happens now? lawyer in that case joins us next. take your razor, yup. up and down, never side to side, shaquem, you got it?
come on stay focused. hard work baby, it gonna pay off. is important to me so father being diagnosed with advanced non-small cell lung cancer made me think of all the things that i wanted to teach my kids. (avo) another tru story with keytruda. (roger) my doctor said i could start on keytruda so i did. with each scan things just got better. (avo) in a clinical study, keytruda offered patients a longer life than chemotherapy. and it could be your first treatment. keytruda is for adults with non-small cell lung cancer that has spread... ...who test positive for pd-l1 and whose tumors do not have an abnormal "egfr" or "alk" gene. it's the immunotherapy with the most fda-approved uses for advanced lung cancer. keytruda can cause your immune system to attack normal organs and tissues in your body and affect how they work. this can happen anytime during or after treatment and may be severe and lead to death. see your doctor right away if you experience new or
worsening cough, chest pain, shortness of breath, diarrhea, severe stomach pain or tenderness, nausea or vomiting, rapid heartbeat, constipation, changes in urine, changes in eyesight, muscle pain or weakness, joint pain, confusion or memory problems, fever, rash, itching or flushing, as this may keep these problems from becoming more serious. these are not all the possible side effects of keytruda. tell your doctor about all your medical conditions including immune system problems, or if you've had an organ transplant or lung, breathing, or liver problems. (roger ) before i'd think of the stuff i might miss. but now with keytruda, we have hope. (avo) living longer is possible. it's tru. keytruda, from merck. ask your doctor about keytruda. here are the facts.leading attacks against prop c. the city's chief economist says prop c will "reduce homelessness" by creating affordable housing, expanding mental-health services, and providing clean restrooms and safe shelters with independent oversight, open books, and strict accountability measures
to make sure every penny goes to solving our homeless crisis. vote yes on c. endorsed by the democratic party, nancy pelosi, and dianne feinstein. recently, more than $20 million has been spent in the race for superintendent of public instruction to attack my friend tony thurmond's record. well, i've worked with tony, and no one is more qualified to lead our state's schools. that's why tony thurmond is the only candidate endorsed by classroom teachers and the california democratic party. because tony will stand up to the donald trump-betsy devos agenda and has always protected our local public schools. join me in voting for tony thurmond. let's put our kids first. a former u.s. attorney for north dakota is part of a legal team for the spirit lake tribe in north dakota. that tribe today suffered a defeat in federal court when a judge turned down the tribe's plea to block north dakota's new
voting law, which is turning out to be a very well targeted means of essentially blocking native americans from voting in next week's crucial north dakota elections. joining us now is that former u.s. attorney tim purdin. thank you very much for joining us tonight. really appreciate you being here. >> thank you for having me, rachel. >> this new law and its effect has received a lot of national attention. we have been covering this closely. this ruling today seems like a big set back. is this the end of the line in terms of the legal fight here? >> well, we're working with our team in the spirit lake tribe to figure out what the next steps are. the tribes are continuing to work tirelessly leading up to the election. as you said in the wind up, rachel, printing new i.d.s, making sure they can get the i.d.s with the street addresses in the hands of the voters in anticipation of next tuesday. >> one of the things we have found frustrating trying to report on this is the secretary of state's office, long-time secretary of state in north dakota, has ben bernanke been unwilling to explain to us in trying to report this out what
his office will accept in terms of acceptable i.d. this will be the first election for which this new rule will be in effect and he just won't say what he'll accept from native american tribe members. do you have a sense of what will be accepted or what won't, or is it as muddy to you as it is to us? >> well, that was the purpose of our lawsuit. once of the purposes of the lawsuit, rachel. let's start with first principles. north dakota does not have voter registration. we're the only state in the country that doesn't have voter registration. that is the vestige of the fact we're very small. small pop lakes. population of north dakota is less than the city of north carolina. out of that history comes the idea that you show up in the polls and you vote. there's no voter evgeny demonstratio -- voter registration process. if you show up at the polls with a voter i.d. either tribal or state that has a picture i.d., date of birth and your current residential address, you're supposed to be able to vote. but what we've seen and what our investigation over the last month revealed and what we
allege in our complaint is, some of those addresses are now being compared against a central voter file. and we had one of our plaintiffs who submitted an absentee ballot and it came back that his address was invalid. again, we don't have voter registration. if you have an i.d. that has a date of birth, picture, residential address, you should be able to vote. so what we're concerned about is next tuesday, are they going to be checking these addresses. when you dive into that and you see all the problems with the voter -- the address assignment system, we have an instance of two people living in the same home that have different addresses in the central voter file. a number of folks who don't have addresses in the voter i.d. -- central voter file, specifically on the reservation where we have large streets that are labelled unknown on the official map. >> tim purdon former u.s. attorney for north dakota. i have a feeling these next five days will keep --
♪ she's doing it again no cover up spray here... it's the irresistibly fresh scent of febreze air effects. cheaper aerosols can cover up odors, burying the smell in a flowery fog. switch to febreze air effects! febreze eliminates even the toughest odors from the air. and it uses an all-natural propellant to leave behind a pleasant scent you'll love. use anywhere odors can spread. freshen up, don't cover up. febreze air effects.
that does it for us tonight. we will see you again tomorrow. now it's time for the last word with the great lawrence o'donnell. good evening, we do on the weekend on the lake, it's never come up. and that is where are you on oprah? for or against? >> oprah is or hopra as far as i'm concerned. when everything else falls to hell and the ash collapses oprah will still be there to show us the way. >> oprah is one of those for whom for and against is obviously a joke. there's no against accept in i guess some crazed precincts. i woke up this morning believing that oprah winfrey should not be a candidate for anything.