Transcripts For MSNBCW The Rachel Maddow Show 20180922 01:00

Were looking forward to that the beat, 6 00 p. M. Eastern week nights. But more importantly the Rachel Maddow show starts right now. Good evening, rachel. Good evening, ari. Thanks. Much appreciated. Thanks for joining us at home. It is friday. So that means the news has again a little nuts again. I feel like there is nothing predictable about American News cycles anymore other than the fact that the cuckoo pops out of the clock reliably every friday night. Thats one thing you can count on. Its friday. Things are nuts. Tonight is no exception. Tonight the cuckoo has popped out of the clock. And over the course of this hour, actually, were waitsing for the next big thing to happen on two very important stories. Ill just tell you flatout, we expect to be covering developments in both of these stories over the course of this evening, potentially into the overnight hours tonight. As i speak right now, its 9 00 p. M. Eastern, and this hour is going to be crucial. Republicans have just issued a threat and a deadline for one hour from now that is aimed at Christine Blasey ford. Thats the woman who in the past week came in with a put forward a serious allegation against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, saying that he attempted to rape here in montgomery county, maryland when he was 17 years old. In just under one hour now, republicans in the senate say that their lawyers must respond to them and must agree to their conditions for their client, dr. Ford, to testify or Senate Republicans are going to go ahead without hearing from her at all and they will schedule a vote for Monday Morning on Brett Kavanaughs Supreme Court nomination regardless of this pending accusation against him from Christine Blasey ford. Now republicans in the senate had initially demanded that dr. Ford had to appear before them to testify on monday or bust. That was the only chance they were going to give her to give testimony to this committee. People who she confided in about the alleged assault after it happened, people she told about this alleged attempted rape before Brett Kavanaugh was ever nominated to the Supreme Court. And thats key to this case, right . Kavanaughs not on trial. No criminal charges have been brought against him. So the senate is not deciding here whether or not theyre going to put him in jail for this. Theyre deciding whether or not theyre going to put him on the Supreme Court while this allegation pends against him. What they need to decide is if this allegation is credible and if it should affect his chances for confirmation. To that end, the testimony and recollections of other people on the edges of the story are crucial. I mean kavanaugh himself denies ever having done this thing. Christine blasey ford says he absolutely did do it. But in addition to that, to support her case, she has named a number of other people who she told after the fact, right, before he was ever named as a nominee to the Supreme Court. As i mentioned, she also named this Alleged Coassailant who she was there for the actual incident. She names other people who were in attendance at the party, might be able to corroborate other details of what she recalls. Part of dr. Fords request to the committee is that there be a full independent investigation of her claims. First, before senators on the committee hold any sort of hearing on this matter, an investigation that would preferably be done by the fbi that would be standard procedure in a case like this because of the fbis role in doing Background Checks on senate confirmable nominees. Background checks on nominees get reopened all the time in the face of new information and new allegations. For some reason, for a reason they have not yet been willing to articulate, the white house and Senate Republicans are insisting in this case that that must not happen here, that the fbi must not be allowed to look into this matter. Republican senator chuck grassley, the chairman of the committee has insisted that only the committee itself should be allowed to investigate this claim, specifically his own staff, who of course have publicly committed themselves to the fact that theyll do anything necessary to confirm Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court. Because the republicans are insisting that the fbi shouldnt look into this, because theyre insisting that only this republicanled committee can do the investigation here with their own staff members, according to Senator Grassley tonight, fords lawyers then requested that, okay, if it is going to be just the committee looking into this, can there at least be testimony from these additional corroborating witnesses. Is k these additional corroborating witnesses dr. Ford has identified, can they at least be allowed to testify too . Its a key part of their claim. Theyre going to be measuring his denials against her claim. She says her claim is bolstered by corroborating witness hoss can back her up. Tonight Senate Republicans said no. They are refusing to hear from any other witnesses. In a letter sent to dr. Fords Attorneys Tonight Made Public by Senator Grassleys office, grassley insist, quote, the committee does not take witness requests from other witnesses. Quote, you said dr. Ford wants to chance to tell her story in public and under oath. This is the country we have given her. We dont need to subpoena additional witnesses to do that. End quote. So thats the word tonight from Senate Republicans. Thats how they want to handle this. They have told this woman, who is alleging this serious Sexual Assault by this nominee that she can take it or leave it. Theyll allow her to testify on wednesday, alone, no witnesses allowed. It will be her versus judge kavanaugh, period. And then there is the deadline. The deadline from Senator Grassley, if she says no to those terms or if she and her lawyers do not respond by 10 00 p. M. Eastern tonight, Senator Grassley is telling her fine, youre out. Were going to vote on it. We need to stop talking about this has to be over. If youre looking for a little insight into why they are just going right to the end here, the polling here may be helpful for understanding that. It seems clear from the polling that they are probably running out of time on this, just as a political matter. Because from the publics perspective, it kind of looks like Brett Kavanaugh is quite overcooked and getting closer and closer to burnt all the time. Usa today has a new poll out today on kavanaugh as of this afternoon, and it shows that kavanaughs public support just continues to absolutely plummet to historically unseen levels. You can see the headline there right now at usa today. Quote, poll kavanaugh faces unprecedented opposition to Supreme Court nomination. And theyre right. No Supreme Court nominee has ever been confirmed with as much public opposition as Brett Kavanaugh has right now, with as little public support as kavanaugh has right now. In this new usa today poll, again, just out this afternoon, Brett Kavanaughs underwater by 9 points. Only 31 of americans want him confirmed compared with 40 of americans who want him not to be confirmed. That makes him the most unpop already Supreme Court nominee ever in the history of the usa today poll. He is minus 9 overall. He is minus 20 with women. That includes all women, right . If you look just at political independence, people who arent registered in either party, he is minus 19 with independence. And as we have seen in this and other major polls, not only is Brett Kavanaughs public support at an unprecedented historic low, it appears to be dropping over time the longer they consider him. So ticktock. I know its friday night, but you may want to keep the news on over the course of this evening because of that, because of what were expecting presumably by the on the other hand this hour, but also because there is this other thing. Now, if ewe been watching this show this week, this is something you might have seen coming. This is something weve been watching percolate all week. Monday night this order from the president announcing that President Trump had directed a number of documents related to the Russia Investigation be declassified and released to the public. And this has been sort of a Running Thing in the Russia Investigation since late last year. The president and pro trump republicans in congress demand, demand that the Justice Department and the fbi hand over internal Law Enforcement documents and communications from the investigation, from this open, Ongoing Investigation into the president and his campaign with regard to russian interference in the election. Now these demands that documents and communications from the Ongoing Investigation be opened up to the public and handed over, these demands clearly serve a coupe of different purposes. I mean, first at just a pr level, at a level of public impressions, making these demands helps the white house and pro trump republicans create a story line, particularly in the Conservative Media that makes it look like Law Enforcement is doing something suspicious here, that the people who are involved in the Russia Investigation have done something maybe wrong, theyve definitely done something theyre trying to hide. Otherwise, why wouldnt they hand over all these documents from their open investigation . Release the memo, what are they hiding . So it creates this impression, oh, theyre hiding something. Something must be wrong. They must have done something bad. Thats one. Also, these demands for Law Enforcement sensitive and investigative materials from an Ongoing Investigation, it also just bluntly, plainly on its face, when they get this stuff, it provides information to the president s defense team. And to other witnesses and potential subjects in the investigation. Any criminal defendant would kill for this, right . If you knew prosecutors were looking into you, or poke around in your business that they might have something on you, youd kill or die to get a window into what prosecutors had on you while theyre still building the case against you. Thats gold. For the president s defense and for the other legal teams caught up in this investigation, im sure it is very handy that the white house and Congressional Republicans keep forcing into the public eye internal, confidential, classified documents from inside that Ongoing Investigation. But there is one other level at which those demands function, and you have seen this for months now. Its its not subtle. It has been sort of clear from the beginning that these demands to the Justice Department, these demands to the fbi, they hand over all these sensitive and classified materials. Its been obvious since they started doing this that part of the aim when they make those demands is that theyre hoping that Law Enforcement officials will say no, right . This is how we got impeachment articles drawn up against Deputy Attorney general Rod Rosenstein, right. This is how we got the first calls from congress, not just from the white house, that rosenstein should be impeach order fired or otherwise removed from office. That Jeff Sessions should be fired or impeached or otherwise removed from office. These demands allow the president and protrump republicans in congress to pound their chests and say look at these terrible officials, at the fbi and the Justice Department. Theyre not handing over these documents that we demanded. Thats outrageous. They must be hiding something. Thats outrageous. These officials are disobeying orders from the president. These officials are disobeying Oversight Efforts from protrump republicans in congress. These officials must be fired. Well, what if these documents arent getting handed over by these Justice Department and fbi officials because these are documents that really Shouldnt Be Made Public . What if handing over those documents would jeopardize national security, would put sources lives at risk, would jeopardize programs and practices in Law Enforcement and intelligence collection that are crucial to keeping the country safe . What if its just sensitive material from an active Law Enforcement investigation that would impede that investigation if these materials were made public . Law enforcement officials dont just open Ongoing Investigations willynilly there is a reason this stuff is kept close. And they know that, right . The idea of demanding documents that really cant be handed over, the biggest idea there is to either Force Resignations in protest from Law Enforcement officials and intelligence officials who know that they have to refuse those demands, or just as well, maybe those officials dont resign in protest. Man they stay in their jobs, but they say no. They refuse those demands, which then conveniently creates a pretext for the president to fire those officials for not following his orders or for not going along with oversight demands from his allies in congress. When the president on monday night issued that order from the white house to declassify all these additional documents related to the Russia Investigation, congressman adam schiff, top democrat on the Intelligence Committee warned that that last dynamic was what was going on here. He said, quote, with respect to some of these materials, i have been previously informed by the fbi and Justice Department that they would consider the release of those materials a red line that must not be crossed because releasing those documents and materials would compromise sources and methods. John mclaughlins former cia director, he has been making the same argument this week as adam schiff has. This is his oped in the Washington Post about why trump must not declassify these materials. The last line of the oped is this, quote, if the president overrides his professional staff and insists on unredacted classified information, it would force some officials, sworn to protect sources and methods of intelligence and Law Enforcement, it would force some officials to consider resignation. John mclaughlin was even more blunt about that on twitter, quote, this probably qualifies as the president s most serious assault on the Justice System yet. Former cia director. Wrong on so many levels for justice, Law Enforcement, intelligence. If he forces it all the way through, it ought to be a Resignation Issue for someone in justice. Period. And then he ends with this question. Maybe trumps intention . Right. Maybe thats the idea. People say no, he gets to fire them. Or they say no, i resign in protest and he says great. Been looking forward to replacing you. Heres how this has unfolded over the course of the week, right . So monday night trump gives this order to declassify all this stuff. On tuesday, the president said online that he was basically very excited about these declassifications. He said that they would prove, quote, really bad things were happening at the fbi, ooh. That was tuesday. Then on wednesday, the president admitted that he hadnt actually read any of these documents that he had ordered to be declassified. He told the hill newspaper that even though he hadnt actually read any of this stuff, the reason he ordered it all declassified anyway that he heard from people he trusts that these are documents that really should be declassified, the complete list of people who he heard from, who he trusts on this issue, who apparently advised him to order these declassifications, that complete list was entirely made up of people who Host Television shows on the fox news channel, i kid you not. So thats whose advising him on this matter. All week long weve been waiting for the stuff to come out. Internal communications among fbi and Rachel Maddow<\/a> show starts right now. Good evening, rachel. Good evening, ari. Thanks. Much appreciated. Thanks for joining us at home. It is friday. So that means the news has again a little nuts again. I feel like there is nothing predictable about American News<\/a> cycles anymore other than the fact that the cuckoo pops out of the clock reliably every friday night. Thats one thing you can count on. Its friday. Things are nuts. Tonight is no exception. Tonight the cuckoo has popped out of the clock. And over the course of this hour, actually, were waitsing for the next big thing to happen on two very important stories. Ill just tell you flatout, we expect to be covering developments in both of these stories over the course of this evening, potentially into the overnight hours tonight. As i speak right now, its 9 00 p. M. Eastern, and this hour is going to be crucial. Republicans have just issued a\rthreat and a deadline for one hour from now that is aimed at Christine Blasey<\/a> ford. Thats the woman who in the past week came in with a put forward a serious allegation against Supreme Court<\/a> nominee Brett Kavanaugh<\/a>, saying that he attempted to rape here in montgomery county, maryland when he was 17 years old. In just under one hour now, republicans in the senate say that their lawyers must respond to them and must agree to their conditions for their client, dr. Ford, to testify or Senate Republicans<\/a> are going to go ahead without hearing from her at all and they will schedule a vote for Monday Morning<\/a> on Brett Kavanaughs<\/a> Supreme Court<\/a> nomination regardless of this pending accusation against him from Christine Blasey<\/a> ford. Now republicans in the senate had initially demanded that dr. Ford had to appear before them to testify on monday or bust. That was the only chance they were going to give her to give testimony to this committee. People who she confided in about the alleged assault after it happened, people she told about this alleged attempted rape before Brett Kavanaugh<\/a> was ever nominated to the Supreme Court<\/a>. And thats key to this case, right . Kavanaughs not on trial. No criminal charges have been brought against him. So the senate is not deciding here whether or not theyre going to put him in jail for this. Theyre deciding whether or not theyre going to put him on the Supreme Court<\/a> while this allegation pends against him. What they need to decide is if this allegation is credible and if it should affect his chances for confirmation. To that end, the testimony and recollections of other people on the edges of the story are crucial. I mean kavanaugh himself denies ever having done this thing. Christine blasey ford says he absolutely did do it. But in addition to that, to support her case, she has named a number of other people who she told after the fact, right, before he was ever named as a nominee to the Supreme Court<\/a>. As i mentioned, she also named this Alleged Coassailant<\/a> who she was there for the actual incident. She names other people who were in attendance at the party, might be able to corroborate other details of what she recalls. Part of dr. Fords request to the committee is that there be a full independent investigation of her claims. First, before senators on the committee hold any sort of hearing on this matter, an investigation that would preferably be done by the fbi that would be standard procedure in a case like this because of the fbis role in doing Background Checks<\/a> on senate confirmable nominees. Background checks on nominees get reopened all the time in the face of new information and new allegations. For some reason, for a reason they have not yet been willing to articulate, the white house and Senate Republicans<\/a> are insisting in this case that that must not happen here, that the fbi must not be allowed to look into this matter. Republican senator chuck grassley, the chairman of the committee has insisted that only\rthe committee itself should be allowed to investigate this claim, specifically his own staff, who of course have publicly committed themselves to the fact that theyll do anything necessary to confirm Brett Kavanaugh<\/a> to the Supreme Court<\/a>. Because the republicans are insisting that the fbi shouldnt look into this, because theyre insisting that only this republicanled committee can do the investigation here with their own staff members, according to Senator Grassley<\/a> tonight, fords lawyers then requested that, okay, if it is going to be just the committee looking into this, can there at least be testimony from these additional corroborating witnesses. Is k these additional corroborating witnesses dr. Ford has identified, can they at least be allowed to testify too . Its a key part of their claim. Theyre going to be measuring his denials against her claim. She says her claim is bolstered by corroborating witness hoss can back her up. Tonight Senate Republicans<\/a> said no. They are refusing to hear from\rany other witnesses. In a letter sent to dr. Fords Attorneys Tonight Made Public<\/a> by Senator Grassley<\/a>s office, grassley insist, quote, the committee does not take witness requests from other witnesses. Quote, you said dr. Ford wants to chance to tell her story in public and under oath. This is the country we have given her. We dont need to subpoena additional witnesses to do that. End quote. So thats the word tonight from Senate Republicans<\/a>. Thats how they want to handle this. They have told this woman, who is alleging this serious Sexual Assault<\/a> by this nominee that she can take it or leave it. Theyll allow her to testify on wednesday, alone, no witnesses allowed. It will be her versus judge kavanaugh, period. And then there is the deadline. The deadline from Senator Grassley<\/a>, if she says no to those terms or if she and her lawyers do not respond by 10 00 p. M. Eastern tonight, Senator Grassley<\/a> is telling her fine, youre out. Were going to vote on it. We need to stop talking about this has to be over. If youre looking for a little insight into why they are just going right to the end here, the polling here may be helpful for understanding that. It seems clear from the polling that they are probably running out of time on this, just as a political matter. Because from the publics perspective, it kind of looks like Brett Kavanaugh<\/a> is quite overcooked and getting closer and closer to burnt all the time. Usa today has a new poll out today on kavanaugh as of this afternoon, and it shows that kavanaughs public support just continues to absolutely plummet to historically unseen levels. You can see the headline there right now at usa today. Quote, poll kavanaugh faces unprecedented opposition to Supreme Court<\/a> nomination. And theyre right. No Supreme Court<\/a> nominee has ever been confirmed with as much public opposition as Brett Kavanaugh<\/a> has right now, with as little public support as kavanaugh has right now. In this new usa today poll, again, just out this afternoon, Brett Kavanaughs<\/a> underwater by 9 points. Only 31 of americans want him confirmed compared with 40 of americans who want him not to be confirmed. That makes him the most unpop already Supreme Court<\/a> nominee ever in the history of the usa today poll. He is minus 9 overall. He is minus 20 with women. That includes all women, right . If you look just at political independence, people who arent registered in either party, he is minus 19 with independence. And as we have seen in this and other major polls, not only is Brett Kavanaughs<\/a> public support at an unprecedented historic low, it appears to be dropping over time the longer they consider him. So ticktock. I know its friday night, but you may want to keep the news on over the course of this evening because of that, because of what\rwere expecting presumably by the on the other hand this hour, but also because there is this other thing. Now, if ewe been watching this show this week, this is something you might have seen coming. This is something weve been watching percolate all week. Monday night this order from the president announcing that President Trump<\/a> had directed a number of documents related to the Russia Investigation<\/a> be declassified and released to the public. And this has been sort of a Running Thing<\/a> in the Russia Investigation<\/a> since late last year. The president and pro trump republicans in congress demand, demand that the Justice Department<\/a> and the fbi hand over internal Law Enforcement<\/a> documents and communications from the investigation, from this open, Ongoing Investigation<\/a> into the president and his campaign with regard to russian interference in the election. Now these demands that documents and communications from the Ongoing Investigation<\/a> be opened up to the public and handed over, these demands clearly serve a coupe of different\rpurposes. I mean, first at just a pr level, at a level of public impressions, making these demands helps the white house and pro trump republicans create a story line, particularly in the Conservative Media<\/a> that makes it look like Law Enforcement<\/a> is doing something suspicious here, that the people who are involved in the Russia Investigation<\/a> have done something maybe wrong, theyve definitely done something theyre trying to hide. Otherwise, why wouldnt they hand over all these documents from their open investigation . Release the memo, what are they hiding . So it creates this impression, oh, theyre hiding something. Something must be wrong. They must have done something bad. Thats one. Also, these demands for Law Enforcement<\/a> sensitive and investigative materials from an Ongoing Investigation<\/a>, it also just bluntly, plainly on its face, when they get this stuff, it provides information to the president s defense team. And to other witnesses and potential subjects in the investigation. Any criminal defendant would kill for this, right . If you knew prosecutors were looking into you, or poke around in your business that they might have something on you, youd kill or die to get a window into what prosecutors had on you while theyre still building the case against you. Thats gold. For the president s defense and for the other legal teams caught up in this investigation, im sure it is very handy that the white house and Congressional Republicans<\/a> keep forcing into the public eye internal, confidential, classified documents from inside that Ongoing Investigation<\/a>. But there is one other level at which those demands function, and you have seen this for months now. Its its not subtle. It has been sort of clear from the beginning that these demands to the Justice Department<\/a>, these demands to the fbi, they hand over all these sensitive and classified materials. Its been obvious since they started doing this that part of the aim when they make those demands is that theyre hoping that Law Enforcement<\/a> officials will say no, right . This is how we got impeachment\rarticles drawn up against Deputy Attorney<\/a> general Rod Rosenstein<\/a>, right. This is how we got the first calls from congress, not just from the white house, that rosenstein should be impeach order fired or otherwise removed from office. That Jeff Sessions<\/a> should be fired or impeached or otherwise removed from office. These demands allow the president and protrump republicans in congress to pound their chests and say look at these terrible officials, at the fbi and the Justice Department<\/a>. Theyre not handing over these documents that we demanded. Thats outrageous. They must be hiding something. Thats outrageous. These officials are disobeying orders from the president. These officials are disobeying Oversight Efforts<\/a> from protrump republicans in congress. These officials must be fired. Well, what if these documents arent getting handed over by these Justice Department<\/a> and fbi officials because these are documents that really Shouldnt Be Made Public<\/a> . What if handing over those documents would jeopardize national security, would put\rsources lives at risk, would jeopardize programs and practices in Law Enforcement<\/a> and intelligence collection that are crucial to keeping the country safe . What if its just sensitive material from an active Law Enforcement<\/a> investigation that would impede that investigation if these materials were made public . Law enforcement officials dont just open Ongoing Investigation<\/a>s willynilly there is a reason this stuff is kept close. And they know that, right . The idea of demanding documents that really cant be handed over, the biggest idea there is to either Force Resignations<\/a> in protest from Law Enforcement<\/a> officials and intelligence officials who know that they have to refuse those demands, or just as well, maybe those officials dont resign in protest. Man they stay in their jobs, but they say no. They refuse those demands, which then conveniently creates a pretext for the president to fire those officials for not following his orders or for not going along with oversight demands from his allies in congress. When the president on monday\rnight issued that order from the white house to declassify all these additional documents related to the Russia Investigation<\/a>, congressman adam schiff, top democrat on the Intelligence Committee<\/a> warned that that last dynamic was what was going on here. He said, quote, with respect to some of these materials, i have been previously informed by the fbi and Justice Department<\/a> that they would consider the release of those materials a red line that must not be crossed because releasing those documents and materials would compromise sources and methods. John mclaughlins former cia director, he has been making the same argument this week as adam schiff has. This is his oped in the Washington Post<\/a> about why trump must not declassify these materials. The last line of the oped is this, quote, if the president overrides his professional staff and insists on unredacted classified information, it would force some officials, sworn to protect sources and methods of intelligence and Law Enforcement<\/a>, it would force some officials to consider\rresignation. John mclaughlin was even more blunt about that on twitter, quote, this probably qualifies as the president s most serious assault on the Justice System<\/a> yet. Former cia director. Wrong on so many levels for justice, Law Enforcement<\/a>, intelligence. If he forces it all the way through, it ought to be a Resignation Issue<\/a> for someone in justice. Period. And then he ends with this question. Maybe trumps intention . Right. Maybe thats the idea. People say no, he gets to fire them. Or they say no, i resign in protest and he says great. Been looking forward to replacing you. Heres how this has unfolded over the course of the week, right . So monday night trump gives this order to declassify all this stuff. On tuesday, the president said online that he was basically very excited about these declassifications. He said that they would prove, quote, really bad things were happening at the fbi, ooh. That was tuesday. Then on wednesday, the president \radmitted that he hadnt actually read any of these documents that he had ordered to be declassified. He told the hill newspaper that even though he hadnt actually read any of this stuff, the reason he ordered it all declassified anyway that he heard from people he trusts that these are documents that really should be declassified, the complete list of people who he heard from, who he trusts on this issue, who apparently advised him to order these declassifications, that complete list was entirely made up of people who Host Television<\/a> shows on the fox news channel, i kid you not. So thats whose advising him on this matter. All week long weve been waiting for the stuff to come out. Internal communications among fbi and Justice Department<\/a> officials related to the Russia Investigation<\/a>. Fbi interviews from the very start of the Russia Investigation<\/a>, portions of the fisa application for his Campaign Adviser<\/a> carter page, the portions that the Justice Department<\/a> has already said cant be safely unredacted. The president has been insisting\rregardless just do it, unredact all of it. Weve been waiting to see if that stuff would come out. Weve been waiting to see if there would be resignation and protests, or if there would be refusals from the Justice Department<\/a> and fbi. Weve been waiting to see if the president might use those refusals as a Pretext To Fire Senior<\/a> Justice Department<\/a> officials who when he wants out of the way anyway. Well, today the president said never mind. The president today withdraw his demand that all these documents get declassified, and instead said he would not push it anymore. He said he hopes the Inspector General<\/a> might look into it. According to multiple reports today, the president arrived at this decision today that he was going to cave, no longer demand the declassification of these documents, he arrived at this decision today after discussions with Deputy Attorney<\/a> general Rod Rosenstein<\/a>, who personally went to the white house to explain to the president The Dangerousness<\/a> of what he was doing in trying\rmake these materials public. If the point of this whole Declassification Showdown<\/a> as set up by fox news hosts, if the whole point of it was to force a confrontation with Rod Rosenstein<\/a>, to push Rod Rosenstein<\/a> into saying no, to push him into refusing the president s demands so the president could then fire him in response, when Rod Rosenstein<\/a> personally went to the white house to talk to the president about this matter, the president appears to have blinked when it came to that confrontation. Rosenstein apparently told him no, you cant let this stuff out. And the president , i think the script they thought he was going to follow at fox news was he would then stand up and say well, youre fired. The president said, okay, then ill withdraw my request. If the president is still looking for a pretext to fire Rod Rosenstein<\/a>, who of course oversees the Robert Mueller<\/a> investigation, so if he was going to fire rosenstein, he could install Somebody Else<\/a> in that job to try to make the\rMueller Investigation<\/a> go away. More on that later. If that was the goal here, the declassification gambit does not seem to have worked. The president does not seem to have had the lets Call It Wherewithal<\/a> to go ahead with that plan. That was this morning. And then this happened. Hours after the president climbed down on that declassification thing, the New York Times<\/a> decided to do this. Quote, Rod Rosenstein<\/a> suggested secretly recording trump and discussed 25th Amendment<\/a>. Quote, Deputy Attorney<\/a> general Rod Rosenstein<\/a> suggested last year that he secretly record President Trump<\/a> in the white house to expose the chaos consuming the administration and he discussed Recruiting Cabinet Members<\/a> to invoke the 25th Amendment<\/a> to remove mr. Trump from office for being unfit. This article today from adam goldman and Michael Schmidt<\/a> at the New York Times<\/a> has led to exactly what you would expect,\rgleeful insistent calls on the right, including from some of the president s closest advisers a the fox news channel, that this is it. Forget all of the other efforts weve come up with to try the fire Rod Rosenstein<\/a>, these other efforts that failed. Forget all the other efforts that failed to create a pretext to fire Rod Rosenstein<\/a>. You can fire him now, mr. President. Rosenstein oversees the Mueller Investigation<\/a>. You want to get rid of the Mueller Investigation<\/a> . Youve got to get rid of Rod Rosenstein<\/a>. Here is your way the do it. Cite this New York Times<\/a> piece and fire them now. Rosenstein was going to wire you, or wire himself, wire other officials going in to spy on you in the white house, rosenstein was going to organize the cabinet to utilize the 25th Amendment<\/a> to oust you from office . He was . Since the New York Times<\/a> posted the story this afternoon, their reporters are definitely standing by what they have published, but both nbc news and the Washington Post<\/a> have\rpublished their own versions of this story, which fundamentally contradicts the whole point of the, in times reporting. The times is insisting that Rod Rosenstein<\/a> seriously proposed wearing a wire, Surreptitiously Recording<\/a> the president inside the white house as part of a serious plot to prove the president s incompetence and get him out of office. The times says their sources for that information were people who were briefed on the fact that Rod Rosenstein<\/a> had said that to other officials and sources who were briefed on a memo that another fbi official, fired Deputy Director<\/a> Andrew Mccabe<\/a> supposedly wrote about this proposal from Rod Rosenstein<\/a>. Those are their sources. Nbc news and the Washington Post<\/a>, however, say as of this afternoon that each of these News Organization<\/a> has a source that was actually in the room when Rod Rosenstein<\/a> supposedly made this proposal, and their source, who, again, was in the room, says that when this happened, Rod Rosenstein<\/a> was quite obviously being sarcastic. Thats the nbc headline. Rosenstein joked about secretly recording trump, Justice Department<\/a> officials say, and you can see that the sub headline there, which according to nbc source, the actual quote, well, what do you want me to do, andy . Wear a wire . That sarcastic quote attributed to Rod Rosenstein<\/a> by someone in the room when he said it. The New York Times<\/a> does not have a source who was in the room when rosenstein said it, but nevertheless they have provided President Trump<\/a> this headline and this fully cooked, fully baked New York Times<\/a> headline inviting the president to fire Rod Rosenstein<\/a> and thereby end the Mueller Investigation<\/a>. On the basis of what Rod Rosenstein<\/a> purportedly said he wanted to do to get the president out of office, never mind the fact that people in the room say he was apparently kidding. So i said we are waiting for a few shoes to drop tonight. If the president does fire Rod Rosenstein<\/a>, regardless of the\rwhich we knew would come in this hour. Can i have the second page of that there, please . Thanks, tom. Weve just gotten the response from dr. Blasey fords attorneys. I havent read it. Would you like to read it with me . All right. Im assuming there is no swear words or anything i should avoid here. Im reading it raw for the first time. Ready . Here we go. Were writing to respond to your emails from earlier today. We are stunned to see the Judiciary Committee<\/a> noticed judge kavanaughs vote from Monday Morning<\/a> in midst of our ongoing discussions regarding the terms and conditions under which dr. Christine blasey ford could testify before the committee. Incredibly you did so well before the 10 00 p. M. Deadline you had arbitrarily imposed just hours before. The imposition of aggressive and artificial deadlines regarding the date and conditions of any hearing has created tremendous and unwarranted anxiety and stress on dr. Ford. Your cavalier treatment of a Sexual Assault<\/a> survivor who has been doing her best to cooperate with the committee is completely\rinappropriate. Yesterday we had what we thought was a productive dialogue about the conditions dr. Ford would find acceptable to be able to testify before the nat Judiciary Committee<\/a> about her allegations of Sexual Assault<\/a> involving judge Brett Kavanaugh<\/a>. Rather than continuing that dialogue, Senator Grassley<\/a> today conveyed a counterproposal through the media insisting on a date i explicitly told you was not feasible for her. Hours after those Media Accounts First<\/a> appeared you rejected a number of the proposals that are important to dr. Ford to ensure that the process would be a fair one, including subpoenaing mark judge to testify. Mark judge, of course, the person who dr. Ford has named as essentially an Alleged Coassailant<\/a> in this attack. Mark judge who was a classmate of kavanaughs was in the room and essentially helping to participate in the attack when it allegedly happened. So, again, that line you rejected a number of the proposals that are important to dr. Ford to ensure that the process would be a fair one,\rincluding subpoenaing mark judge to testify. Instead, i dont spent much of her email making points that distorted the requests we made. It would be fruitless to review each of those statements because now it is abundantly clear regardless of the assurances Senator Grassley<\/a> has made, you have been tasked with pressuring dr. Ford to agree to conditions you find advantageous to the nominee, and also with denying democratic members of the Judiciary Committee<\/a> any input about how this hearing would proce proceed. When we urge youd to include them, meaning democrats in our discussions today, you rejected that request outright, accusing them, democrats, of being the source of leaks. Even more disturbing, while you took almost a full day to consider our proposal, you demanded a response to your approximately this evening. By email sent today at 4 01 p. M. , we advise youd dr. Ford had travelled to meet with the fbi for several hours about the Death Threats<\/a> she has been receiving, and we would need until tomorrow to confer with her and to be able to provide\ryou with a well considered response. Rather than allowing her the time she needs to respond to the take it or leave it demands you conveyed, you sent us an email at 5 47 p. M. , which you again gave to the media first, insisting we accept your invitation for a wednesday hearing by 10 00 p. M. Tonight. I now have learned that Senator Grassley<\/a> has scheduled the committees vote on Brett Kavanaugh<\/a> for this monday. The 10 00 p. M. Deadline is arbitrary. Its sole purpose is to bully dr. Ford and to deprive her of the ability the make a considered decision that has life atering implications for her and her family. She has already been forced out of her home and continues to be subject to harassment, hate mail, and Death Threats<\/a>. Our modest request is that she be given an additional day to make her decision. And then it is signed by attorney representing Christine Blasey<\/a> ford. Theyre asking for one additional day to make her decision. Again, you are learning this. You are reading this as i am\rreading this. Were going to see what we can do to figure out what the response to this is going to be, either from the Judiciary Committee<\/a> or if there is anything further coming from dr. Fords side, from her legal representation. This just in. Well be right back. Ht back. Some say the oldest living thing east of the mississippi. Its weathered countless storms. Battered, but never broken, it stands for the resilience within us all. One look at you and i cant disguise ive got hungry eyes applebees new 3course meal starting at 11. 99. Now thats eatin good in the neighborhood. Take us downtown, waze. Waze integration seamlessly connecting the world inside. With the world outside. Making life a little. Easier. Introducing the wellconnected lincoln mkc. When you have doctors working as a team for your health, you get the care you need to help you thrive. Visit kp. Org to learn more. Kaiser permanente. Thrive. So the New York Times<\/a> published this enormously controversial article this afternoon. They reported that Deputy Attorney<\/a> general Rod Rosenstein<\/a>, who oversees the Mueller Investigation<\/a> at a meeting last year, he suggested to other\rJustice Department<\/a> and fbi officials that he could secretly record President Trump<\/a> inside the white house. The times also reported that rosenstein had also discussed potentially invoking the 25th Amendment<\/a> to get the cabinet to remove the president from office. Now Rod Rosenstein<\/a> put out an initial statement in response to that article, saying that the article was not true, that it was that its claims had no basis in reality, and he said, quote, i never pursue excuse me. He said, based on my personal dealings with the president , there is no basis to invoke 25th Amendment<\/a>. That was the first statement. That was earlier today. But now Rod Rosenstein<\/a> has just released a new statement, a second statement also responding to that story. It is a single sentence. I will read to it you now. He says, quote, i never pursued or authorized recording the president , and any suggestion that i have ever advocated for the removal of the president is absolutely false. Now the reason im shuffling papers a little bit and picking\rup the wrong thing here and there is because this news continues to break. Just within the last couple of minutes, the Washington Post<\/a> has said that that statement, the one i just read to you where rosenstein says i never pursued or authorized recording the president , ive never advocated for the removal of the president , the Washington Post<\/a> has new reporting about that, saying, quote, that statement from rosenstein came after white house officials pressured the Justice Department<\/a> to issue a more forceful denial of the timess reporting. The president asked advisers on friday if he should fire rosenstein, and some of those around trump sought to sway him not to make any decision friday night. Joining us now is Chuck Rosenberg<\/a>, msnbc contributor, former u. S. Attorney, former fbi and Justice Department<\/a> official. Mr. Rosenberg, it is nice to you here tonight. Thank you for being here. My pleasure, rachel. Thank you for having me. This is obviously still a developing story. Were watching two big\rdeveloping stories right now. The continuing connotation impasse this the senate over the Confirmation Hearings<\/a> for Brett Kavanaugh<\/a> and whether the senate will hear allegations from a woman who says that he sexually assaulted her when he was a teenager. Were watching that develop over the course of this simultaneously we have watched and now into tonight the development of this story about Rod Rosenstein<\/a>. Whats your reaction to that base level reporting from the New York Times<\/a> today that Rod Rosenstein<\/a>, according to the times suggested that he might wear a wire Into The White House<\/a> to record the president or that and or that the cabinet essentially might be organized to invoke the 25th Amendment<\/a> to remove the president . Yeah, ive been thinking about this a lot since that story broke, rachel, and i think i have i think i have narrowed it down to what i think are two plausible explanations. The first is in healthy organizations, any organization, msnbc, tech companies, engineering firms, the department of justice and the\rfbi, when you have a difficult problem, when you have something thats really perplexing, you bring all your people together and you encourage them to speak openly and freely and put all of your ideas on the table. And that means from the mundane to the thoughtful to the crazy, and you talk it through, and hopefully by the end of the day you eliminate the crazy and you select something else. So is it possible they talked about this and then eliminated it as a possibility . Its possible. I think the more likely explanation, however, is that it was just plain old sarcasm. Remember, at this time, a very fine director of the fbi, jim comey had just been fired. The department is reeling. The fbi is reeling. And so i cant imagine that it occurred to them that they would do something absolutely unprecedented, wire up the Deputy Attorney<\/a> general and send him in to talk to the president. It doesnt make sense to me for a whole bunch of reasons, including by the way, it would make Rod Rosenstein<\/a> arguably a\rwitness in that very case. Once he wears a wire against the president , hes a witness. Chuck, part of the reason that this story from the New York Times<\/a> is so controversial is other News Organization<\/a>s, including nbc news and the Washington Post<\/a> have said that they have a source who was inside the meeting where this was reportedly said by Rod Rosenstein<\/a>, and in both News Organization<\/a>s report that as you say, as you suggested there, when Rod Rosenstein<\/a> made comments about potentially wearing a wire Into The White House<\/a>, he was clearly being sarcastic. The New York Times<\/a> is reporting it as the if this was a substantive, serious proposal that mr. Rosenstein may have even wanted the pursue. Other News Organization<\/a>s say actually suggested that he was kidding. Thats one of the reasons this is controversial. The other reason this is so controversial is because its plain from the president s back and forth with the Conservative Media<\/a> that theyve been trying to come up with some great public pretext for firing Rod Rosenstein<\/a> for quite some time,\rand it appears like the New York Times<\/a> is sort of handing him that, by putting words in rosensteins mouth that would be so controversial, the president could conceivably cite them as justification for firing him. What do you make of that side of this story . That worries me, rachel. But there is a certain irony here. The president speaks repeatedly of the fake news and tells americans, i think sadly, to distrust the news, particularly organize begans like the New York Times<\/a>. And now perhaps when it benefits him, when he needs to cite to it as a reason to take this action against Rod Rosenstein<\/a>, suddenly its a trustworthy paper. Its the old gray lady. But it worries me very much. I think what mr. Rosenstein put out tonight, that he neither authorized nor pursued the recording of the president put buttresses the notion that they at least spoke it. Even if it was crazy idea which\rthey all eventually took off the table. But i sure hope he doesnt fire Rod Rosenstein<\/a>. Ive had my disagreements with mr. Rosenstein. Ive said some of them publicly on your show, but right now i think hes doing us a Service Standing<\/a> between the white house and bob mueller. Do you expect that if the president did move to fire him, whether it was tonight author weekend or any time in coming days that there would be a serious reaction within the Law Enforcement<\/a> and Intelligence Community<\/a> . I think there would be a dramatic reaction. I think folks know that bob mueller is a fine and decent and honest and thorough special counsel, and that the men and women working for him are sticking to the facts and the law. In getting rid of Rod Rosenstein<\/a> would be would bring us i think one step closer to either either eliminating the special counsels role or circumscribing it in a way that would make it very difficult for bob mueller and his team to do their jobs. Chuck rosenberg, former attorney, forrer fbi. Thank you for being with us on a friday night. Thank you, rachel. A bit of a Whiplash Inducing<\/a> news night. More to come. Stay with us. Opportunity is everywhere. Like here. And here. See . Opportunity. Hi cinturones por favor. Gracias. Everywhere. About to be parents. Its doing a lot of kicking down there. Meeting the parents. Its gonna be fine. And this driver, logging out to watch his kid hit one out of the. Go dani, go opportunity is everywhere. All you have to do to find it is get out. Here. We are the tv doctors of america, and we may not know much about medicine, but we know a lot about drama. We also know that you can avoid drama by getting an annual checkup. So go, know, and take control of your health. It could save your life. Cigna. Together, all the way. Republicans demands about the circumstances under which they wanted her to testify next week on wednesday, no other witnesses besides her and Brett Kavanaugh<\/a>. And if she either did not respond by 10 00 p. M. Tonight, or if she rejected any of those terms, they said that they were going to forget this whole issue, not pursue this allegation at all, and just hold a vote Monday Morning<\/a> on Brett Kavanaugh<\/a> without ever hearing from Christine Blasey<\/a> ford. Weve now had a response from Christine Blasey<\/a> fords attorneys asking for one more day for her to consider this decision. So far no response, although were watching for it from Senator Grassley<\/a>s office, or from the rest of the committee. Thats on the one hand. The other story that were watching unfold tonight pertains to Deputy Attorney<\/a> general Rod Rosenstein<\/a>. Deputy attorney general Rod Rosenstein<\/a> oversees the Mueller Investigation<\/a>. He has come under withering criticism from President Trump<\/a> and from the Conservative Media<\/a>, which has increasingly with increasing insistence told\rPresident Trump<\/a> that he must fire Rod Rosenstein<\/a>, presumably as a way to try to undo rosensteins oversight of the Mueller Investigation<\/a> and install Somebody Else<\/a> who would either end that probe or circumscribe it, as Chuck Rosenberg<\/a> was just describing here on this air. The New York Times<\/a> today reported that Rod Rosenstein<\/a> in meetings with other Justice Department<\/a> and fbi officials had suggested wearing a wire Into The White House<\/a> to record the president and had suggested liaising with members of the cabinet to talk about using the 25th Amendment<\/a> to remove President Trump<\/a> from office. This reporting is contested. Both nbc news and the Washington Post<\/a> are citing a source who was in the meeting when rosenstein reportedly said this, saying it was quite clear that rosenstein made the do you want me to wear a wire comment in gist. Rosenstein has put out a statement tonight saying he never authorized or suggested doing that and never suggested using the 25th Amendment<\/a> to\rremove the president nor has he ever suggest issed removing the president. The Washington Post<\/a> reported moments ago the president has been asking advisers tonight if he should fire Rod Rosenstein<\/a>. As i said, its all happening all at once. Joining once. Joining us now is wen wittis. Thanks for joining us tonight as we try to stay up with the breaking news. Its hard to keep up with it. It is. Let me ask you first about Brett Kavanaugh<\/a>. The situation that we are in right now is not unprecedented in the sense that there have been other nominees where sensitive, serious allegations have arisen late in the Confirmation Process<\/a> and the senate has had to decide what to do with sort of late breaking allegations that they didnt consider earlier in the process. What do you think about whats happening right now with this impasse between Christine Blasey<\/a> fords attorneys and the committee. And how do you think ultimately this should resolve . So i can see a number of possible ways it could resolve,\rbut one of them that is not acceptable is to not actually investigate the allegations, which is what the chairman is at this point threatening to do. His terms include you show up on monday or were going to have a vote and we wont talk to any of the other possible witnesses. Now, i can see a lot of room for argument around the edges about what the appropriate process is, but its very hard for me to see that the appropriate process, if youre actually interested in learning the truth, would involve voting without investigating or hearing from the two principles without hearing from anybody else who might know what happened or something about what happened. And so i say this hesitantly, but i honestly cant see any\rsigns of good faith here. In terms of judge kavanaughs nomination overall, you have suggested that he should consider withdrawing from consideration. We are starting to see in some republican senators, Susan Collins<\/a> tonight making remarks suggesting that she disagrees with Senator Grassley<\/a>s approach here, that theres no reason why monday should be the only day that dr. Ford can come in or wednesday should be the only day, that theres no reason to push these things. We are seeing i think a real softening around the edges in people being able to predict how this is going to end. Why did you suggest that judge kavanaugh should consider withdrawing, and do you think he will . So i dont i assume he will not. I assume that he like most people in this circumstance will want to, you know, defend his reputation. And, you know, most people facing the possibility of confirmation to the Supreme Court<\/a> dont easily walk away\rfrom it. And so i assume he will not follow my advice. But i want to be clear about what that advance was. It was not to walk away but to walk away if he cannot defend himself in a fashion that is disposive factually, that is completely convincing without attacking her. And i think thats a its hard for me to imagine the circumstances in which he could do that effectively, but i think if he can do that, he certainly should. If he cant do that, i think it is better for him, better for her, and better for the institution of the court not to have somebody confirmed with a big asterisk by his name, that, you know, tens of millions, hundreds of millions of people will scratch their heads every time they see his name on an\ropinion from now until 30 years from now. Ben, i cant let you go without asking you about the other major story were following tonight. Do you believe that Rod Rosenstein<\/a>s job is in jeopardy tonight . And if the president does act to remove him, what do you think the response will be within the Legal Community<\/a> and the Justice Department<\/a> . Yeah, so let me be first of all, Chuck Rosenberg<\/a> said a lot of the things that i would say in response to this, so i can be brief. But Rod Rosenstein<\/a>s job has been in peril for many months. Every day, you know, the president can have a Temper Tantrum<\/a> and remove him. And there have been a number of days where i thought that was happening. I actually dont think that it is likely to happen tonight, but i have no basis for that. Its just a kind of gut instinct. Look, i do think this story puts him in a very difficult position, and his inability to deny it completely. He denies kind of around it. He denies the tone of certain things. He denies most of it, but he doesnt deny that he had a conversation or multiple conversations about the 25th Amendment<\/a>. And he doesnt deny that at least the subject of wearing a wire came up. And that does put him in a very difficult position with respect to the president. I continue to think that the president , you know, is something of a barking dog that doesnt actually bite very much about these things with the singular exception of jim comey. And so, you know, he actually doesnt need a pretext to remove Rod Rosenstein<\/a>. He could have done it yesterday, the day before, the week before. And he hasnt done it because, i dont mean to taunt him into trying. He hasnt done it because he actually doesnt have a lot of guts about this sort of thing. Its a terrible idea. He absolutely shouldnt do it, and rosenstein for all my differences with him is playing a very Important Role<\/a> right now, and a very you know one we should all value as a society. So i continue to hope that the president will continue to lack the guts to actually do this thing that he keeps threatening both with rosenstein and with sessions. And every day that he doesnt do it is a good day for the day to day function of the rule of law. Ben wittis, editor and chief of the law fair blog. Appreciate it. Stay with us. R blog appreciate it. Stay with us ooh, heaven is a place on earth \ruhp. I didnt believe it. Again. Ooh, baby, do you know what thats worth . I want to believe it. [ claps hands ] ooh im not hearing the confidence. Okay, hold the name your price tool. Power of options based on your budget and well make heaven a place on earth yeah oh, my angels ooh, heaven is a place on earth [ sobs quietly ]\rthis is our era. This is Americas Energy<\/a> era. Nextera energy sutton lake is in wilmington, north carolina. Started out as a cooling pond for the sutton power plant, which is owned by duke energy. There are three large coal ash dumps right nearby sutton lake. The lake of the coal ash dumps and the Coal Ash Landfill<\/a> is near together. Coal ash is dangerous. Its very important to keep all that coal ash away from the lake and the fish and the humans who go there let alone the adjacent river. Well, today flood waters breached the dam at sutton lake. Lake water then flooded one of the three large coal ash dumps that lines the lakeshore. Duke energy, which owns that plant says they dont believe the breach, quote, poses a significant threat to nearby","publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"archive.org","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","width":"800","height":"600","url":"https:\/\/vimarsana.com\/images\/vimarsana-bigimage.jpg"}},"autauthor":{"@type":"Organization"},"author":{"sameAs":"archive.org","name":"archive.org"}}],"coverageEndTime":"20240618T12:35:10+00:00"}