Skip to main content

tv   All In With Chris Hayes  MSNBC  January 18, 2022 5:00pm-6:00pm PST

5:00 pm
people who died from covid had diabetes. those numbers may look different with vaccination and omicron but the cdc lists diabetes as a condition where people are more likely to get severely ill. having zero problem risking the life of your colleague because you don't feel like putting a mask on, you, neil gorsuch, are to rotten co-worker, dangerous to be near in a pandemic and tonight's absolute worst. that's tonight's "reidout." "all in with chris hayes" starts now. tonight on "all in," all the networks are reporting new subpoenas for trump attorneys. >> oh, my goodness, all the networks! wow! >> tonight congressman adam schiff what they want to know. plus, how team trump's campaign of lies laid the groundwork foorn attempted coup. and george conway on why he says prosecutors must start investigating donald trump.
5:01 pm
and the fight for voting rights finally begins on the senate floor and the shocking report of a supreme court justice and his refusal to wear a mask to protect his supreme court colleague. "all in" starts right now. good evening from new york. i'm chris hayes. tonight the committee investigating the seditious conspiracy to overthrow the 2020 election has moved one step closer to donald trump himself who by all accounts is not close with many people. but for years especially since the start of his political career there has been one man by his side. rudy giuliani. early in his own career in new york, giuliani, of course, made his name as a tough, hard charging crime fighting prosecutor. he would head up one of the most powerful trial courts in the country, the southern district of new york. that catapulted him to mayor and despite a polarizing tenure as mayor he then rose to national prominence after 9/11 just weeks before he was set to leave
5:02 pm
office. in 2008 giuliani was considered the frontrunner at one point to become president himself. but in the years since giuliani's devolved into something of a political punchline. even helping bring about trump's first impeachment with his attempts to dig up dirt about the bidens in ukraine. and giuliani perhaps more than anyone our outside the government worked to abet donald trump's january 6th coup which led to donald trump's second impeachment. giuliani's efforts culminated with that truly bizarre press conference at four seasons total landscaping in 2020. and today the bipartisan committee investigating january 6th has decided it needs to speak with goouchlt he was subpoenaed along with his fellow coup-attempting lawyer sidney powell and jenna ellis and trump campaign advisor boris epshteyn. giuliani and powell and ellis were everywhere in the days following the 2020 election. you probably remember their faces and that footage. and more than anyone except maybe donald trump and maybe even more than him, honestly,
5:03 pm
they worked to push the big lie of election fraud and countless deranged conspiracy theories, which of course laid the groundwork for the january 6th insurrection. according to the letter to giuliani from the committee, quote, between mid-november 2020 and january 6th, 2021 and there after you promoted claims of election fraud on bam of former president donald trump and sought to convince state legislator to overturn the results. according to witness testimony and public reporting in december 2020 you urged president trump to direct the seizure of voting machines around the country after being told the department of homeland security had no lawful authority to do so. according to public reporting on january 6th and days prior, you were in contacts with then-president trump and members of congress regarding strategies for delaying or overturning the results of the 2020 election. as for sidney powell, who pushed perhaps some of the most banana spaer spears, for instance,
5:04 pm
about venezuela and other countries hacking the election, the committee writes, quote, you urged president trump to direct the seizure of voting machines around the country, defying evidence that foreign adversaries hacked those conditions. the committee notes that ellis and epshteyn worked to publicly sow doubts in the results of the elections. the committee notes you publicly promoted claims that 2020 election was stolen and participated in attempts to disrupt or it delay the certification of the election results based on your allegations. now, the committee is right. i mean, this is not a hidden plot. we know all of this is true because we saw them do it right out in the open. >> the dominion voting systems, the smartmatic technology software and the software that goes in other computerized voting systems here as well, not just dominion, were created in venezuela at the direction of
5:05 pm
hugo chavez to make sure he never lost an election after one constitutional referendum came out the way he didn't want it to come out. >> they stole the election. not the first one they stole. not the last one they are going to steal unless we do something about it. >> president trump is right there was widespread fraud in this election. we have six states that were interrupted if not more through the voting systems. we know that president trump won in a landslide. >> okay. all of that is false. you know that's false. i just feel duty bound to say that after we play people making false claims. all false. what is interesting about this particular round of subpoenas is that they appear to be broadening the scope of the investigation by the committee. they are not specifically about that day and about the attack on the capitol on january 6th. instead, the ways in which trump's allies laid the groundwork for the insurrection to take place because without the big lie of a stolen election without giuliani and powell and ellis beating the drums, there
5:06 pm
would be no pretense to storm the capitol. it's notable that donald trump is still pushing that big lie. if anything, he has only gotten more braise been it the last year. it's the subtext, if not the text, behind his likely 2024 run, the election was stolen from his last time, so he is running to take back what is his. it's clear he is gearing up to run the same playbook again. >> another one is a real fighter, a lawyer, tough and smart, working on a lot of different things, boris, most people call him epshteyn. but i call him boris epshteyn because that's the way -- epshteyn, which is the way they say it in his original country. and he has been incredible and a fighter. boris. hi, boris. boris epshteyn. >> i'm glad he took that note on the pronunciation. as the committee points out,
5:07 pm
epshteyn works to help overturn the last election which makes him the type of fighter trump needs to do it again. they are not hiding it. adam schiff serves on the committee investigating january 6th, a lead house manager for donald trump's first impeachment and he joins me now. congressman schiff, let's talk about rudy giuliani, who was a central figure in both of these -- in both plots that resulted in impeachments. why is it important the committee sit down and talk to him here? >> i think that you can see by the series of subpoenas we have issued over time, they are going to higher and higher people in and around the administration. and rudy giuliani was really at the center of things. he was one of the most aggressive promoters of that big lie about the election. he was involved in trying to get these state legislators to send alternate slates of electors or to delay sending slates of electors. to me the most shocking claims
5:08 pm
are some of those that you just repeated, chris, and that is they were involved in urging the president reportedly to seize voting machines. that's the kind of thing you see in the developing world. you don't see it, at least until now, in the united states of america. so there is a lot he could tell our committee, certainly a lot we have uncovered already. but i think he is a pretty central figure in all of this. >> should we interpret the issuance of subpoenas to mean that invitations for voluntary cooperation were rebuffed? >> you know, that's not always the case. you know, generally, we do seek voluntary cooperation to begin with. we know certain parties are likely to be hostile, we don't waste time spending weeks trying to get their voluntary cooperation and we have gone straight to subpoenas in some circumstances. you are right about one of the points you made earlier.
5:09 pm
our inquiry is broader than just what happened on a single day. it's all of the multiple lines of effort to overturn the election and culminating in that attack on the capitol. it's important to under january 6th to understand the context of all of these other failed efforts to overturn the election and then the last resort, which we saw on the 6th, was violence. >> it's hard to keep track of what information we have is public and not. obviously, there are a lot of moving parts, a lot of things building up to that, but this jumped out at me in the boris epshteyn letter. you were reported to have participated in a call with former president trump on the morning of january 6th, options were discussed to delay the certification of the election results. i don't know if you track what's public and what's not. but what do we know about that phone call? >> i try to track what's public
5:10 pm
and what's not. as you might imagine, have to err on the safe side in terms of the committee. obviously, we would like to know anything that went on during that call, what other options that that very late stage were being contemplated to try to still overturn the election, and so he is, obviously, if he was on that call, he will have a lot to tell us. if he was part of that war room at the willard hotel, he would have a lot to tell us. and we hope that he will answer the subpoena and, if not, as with the others, we will have to figure out what the recourse is. >> there is a number of documents that you have been seeking from a variety of sources. i want to go through them. to note here, bernie kerrick talked to the committee, provided a batch of documents to the select committee. i raise that to note that, obviously, the people that don't comply like steve bannon and mark meadows are newsworthy for obvious reasons.
5:11 pm
the vast majority of people that you wanted to talk to, you have talked to, including some people like bernie kerrick that one might suppose wouldn't talk to you since he is an ally or loyalist to former president trump. >> well, that's right. you know, mr. kerick worked with rudy giuliani. this is all a matter of public record. and a great many people are cooperating with us. so we would hope that everyone would. certainly a great many now, i think over 400, have cooperateled with us. but you can -- you know, getting back to the point i was making earlier. as we get to more and more significant witnesses, they, you know, they are often closer and closer to donald trump and, therefore, people that the former president is urging and has some leverage over in terms of getting them to refuse to cooperate. so we are, as you say, getting a lot of help, and sometimes even less publicly known witnesses can offer some of the most
5:12 pm
important insights. but i can't be more particular than that. >> yeah, we should note, i don't know if we have the b roll of the infamous four seasons landscaping press conference of rudy giuliani. but bernie kerrick is in that shot. he is standing behind rudy giuliani there. as you said, a matter of public record. there is also some news breaking just recently that the national archives, which is in possession of, has custody over a tranche of documents the committee is seeking related to the ex-president while he was in office, intends to turn some of those over tomorrow at 6:00 p.m. according to a doj letter. the docs were not covered by the d.c. circuit's -- supreme court hasn't acted on president trump's emergency request yet. do you anticipate those being transmitted to you? >> i hope so. we will have to see what happens. i would certainly hope so. and i would hope that the
5:13 pm
supreme court will very quickly resolve the litigation regarding the archives and refuse to take up the case from below, both of the legislative branch and executive branch be in agreement the records should be provided and it would be antithetical to a conservative court to disagree request those two branches of government. the only reason to do so would be if they have become nothing more than a partisan court. >> this court moved expeditiously to have full briefing, full arguments, and a full decision regarding the vaccine mandate that the biden administration proposed. it was notable to me that when motivated, they appear to have the ability to move quite quickly. i wonder if you noted that as well. >> yes, without a doubt. and you are seeing the other courts, the district and court of appeals, move in our
5:14 pm
particular case. and there is no reason the supreme court can't also, particularly when the law, i think, is so clear and would clearly militate in favor of not taking up the case. so i hope that they will move with swiftness. >> finally, there is another subpoena that we found out about, phone records. again, there are sort of third-party subpoenas that we've found out about through press reports to tech companies that may be in possession of records. in this case, eric trump and kimberly guilfoyle's phone records that have been subpoenaed by the january 6th committee. eric trump calling it in a statement a witch hunt in a one-sentence statement. can you confirm that those subpoenas have happened? >> i can't confirm any particular subpoenas. but i can say that we have acknowledged that early on we sent letters, preservation letters to these telecommunications companies.
5:15 pm
we have followed up with subpoenas to request records in certain cases, and, you know, these records, i should emphasize, they are not the content of conversations. they are the, you know, who was the party to the conversations, the dates, the duration. but that could be very important evidence that leads to additional witness, can corroborate the testimony of witness, can tell us who was in communication with whom while the attack on january 6th was going on. so that can be very important, but in this case i can only talk generally and can't confirm with respect to those two particular people. >> finally, and i know you are one member of a committee with multiple members, and, you know, i don't know how the communications work here, but i wonder if you have any indication from any of the subjects of these four subpoenas that were issued today about what they intend to do. >> i don't have any indication yet. i think we can anticipate certain things that they are likely to say.
5:16 pm
i have think rudy giuliani's attorney has made some public comments about him claiming attorney/client privilege or executive privilege. there are clearly lots of activities that he was a witness to and a participant to that do not implicate attorney/client privilege or where that privilege would be waived. it's unyou can likely that executive privilege applies at all. when we, for example, subpoenaed hannity, we made it clear we weren't interested in his journalistic work on fox, if that's what you call that. there are plenty of facts that mr. giuliani and others, attorneys or otherwise can testify to that are not privileged and we want to make sure that the committee has all of the facts that we can present to the american people. >> all right. congressman adam schiff, thank you very much. >> thank you. of course, the attack on the capitol couldn't have happened without the constant drum beat
5:17 pm
of baseless election fraud conspiracies that came before it and the trump allies facing subpoenas tonight were some of the most influential, most high-profile team members in that effort. next, how donald trump's election fraud a-team fanned the flames of big lie and the many lawsuits some are facing as a result. lawsuits some are facing as a lawsuits some are facing as a result like reading! be the best, caleb! statistically impossible, caleb. umpire: strike three, you're out! you'll get 'em nme! or you won't, probably won't. and it won't impact your future whatsoever! talk to us about college planning today. feel comfortable about tomorrow. massmutual.
5:18 pm
entresto is the number one heart failure brand prescribed by cardiologists and has helped over one million people. it was proven superior at helping people stay alive and out of the hospital. don't take entresto if pregnant; it can cause harm or death to an unborn baby. don't take entresto with an ace inhibitor or aliskiren, or if you've had angioedema with an ace or arb. the most serious side effects are angioedema, low blood pressure, kidney problems, or high blood potassium. ask your doctor about entresto. ♪ i'm steven, i'm 52, and i'm a makeup artist. i met my husband in 2002. ♪ i miss those eyes. do you think you could fall in love again?
5:19 pm
i'm so ready, you know? so, what do you see when you look at yourself? i see a really long life lived of vast experiences. botox® cosmetic is fda approved to temporarily make frown lines, crow's feet and forehead lines look better. the effects of botox® cosmetic may spread hours to weeks after injection, causing serious symptoms. alert your doctor right away as difficulty swallowing, speaking, breathing, eye problems, or muscle weakness may be a sign of a life-threatening condition. do not receive botox® cosmetic if you have a skin infection. side effects may include allergic reactions, injection site pain, headache, eyebrow, eyelid drooping, and eyelid swelling. tell your doctor about your medical history, muscle or nerve conditions, and medications including botulinum toxins as these may increase the risk of serious side effects see for yourself at the pandemic made teaching and learning really hard. but instead of working to help students safely return to the classroom, the san francisco school board focused on renaming schools and playing politics. and they've even saddled
5:20 pm
our district with a $125 million deficit. our children can't wait for new leadership. here's our chance for a fresh start. on february 15th, please recall school board members collins, lópez and moliga before our kids fall even further behind. january 6th happened of course
5:21 pm
at the capitol. today spooebs from the committee investigating that date moved beyond the events that have day. in washington, d.c., to the massive effort in the country in the months leading up to the attack. one of the four subpoenaed, of the four people who just got subpoenaed, three spent weeks travel interesting state to state spreading trump's big lie. they were planting the seeds the election had been stolen from donald trump. he had been wronged by extension, so had his supporters and lighting the flame for the january 6th insurrection. >> oh, my goodness! all the networks! wow! all the networks! we have to forget about the law. >> american patriots are fed up with the corruption from the local level to the highest level of our government, and we are going to take this country back. >> it's very interesting to see what's going on and this was an
5:22 pm
election that we won easily. we won it by a lot. >> i gave you the answer. the answer i gave you, they didn't bother to interview a single witness. >> what the state legislatures need to recognize is that they don't need these governors. >> we use a venezuelan voting machine, in essence, to count our vote. we let this happen, we will become venezuela. we cannot let this happen to us. >> justice correspondent for "the new york times," harry litman, the former deputy assistant attorney general. and they both join me now. harry, let me start with you. it's always been striking to me if professional legal ethical codes and the guild of the bar means anything, it's supposed to enforce some codes of conduct so you can't just go into court and make baseless claims and waste everyone's time, yet these individuals seem to have done a lot of that and encouraged some
5:23 pm
bit of professional sanction and wrath for it. what is the legal system been doing with these lawyers before today's subpoenas? >> gearing up. look, giuliani's already has his license spus spended in new york and d.c. powell is already in a world of hurt in michigan, owing some $200,000 in legal fees and being referred for disbarment. jenna ellis's claims, her own credentials have been wildly misrepresented. there are canness that say you can't lie to the court and public. as lawyers, these guys are walking train wrecks. -- their own credentials is to say false things for trump. at the ethical legal level i think the system is catching up to them. of course, today is more about their own concerted action and possible civil and criminal liability and even more important as i think congressman schiff made clear, their
5:24 pm
possible connection to the president and all of the activity on january 6th and before and after. but they are in a world of hurt. i have wouldn't expect them to be practicing lawyers in a matter of a year or so. >> katie, how significant do you think the subpoenas of the three individuals by the committee has given their proximity to trump and the fact that we know these are people in regular contact with him throughout those key months in the build-up to the 6th? >> i think the subpoenas have a lot of optical significance because of the proximity these folks have to donald trump. it's very unlikely they will provide the committee with any information even if they are charged with contempt. that doesn't mean you have to provide the committee any information ever. symbolically, it's important these people be subpoenaed because there is evidence that they could provide. also keep in mind what they were doing in spreading the big lie, if you look at the justice department, what they said on january 5th with attorney
5:25 pm
general merrick garland's recent statements and what has come out in hearings with the head of the national security division, the big lie is something that has animated domestic extremism. and if you are the justice department you see attack on january 6th as an act of domestic extremism or even domestic terrorism. as the committee tries to figure out why this happened, they will want to know motivation and people said their motivation coming to the capitol is the belief that the election was stolen and the justice department's own national security experts continue to say it is the big lie that continues to fuel domestic extremism here at home. >> yeah. we've made this point before. it's an important one, the point you are making, katie, to reiterate, that if you think it is the case that a free and fair election was actually stolen successfully by joe biden and put in power against the will of the people, you are living in truly extreme times in which the rule of law hasn't held, right? there is a kind of permission structure for radical action
5:26 pm
implicit in the belief that that's actually the case. of course, that's key to what we're seeing. a follow-up katie. this is reporting of a colleague of yours, not your buy lin of "the new york times." hundreds of people who have been processed through the legal system, that in at least one case an individual are said to have asked about trump's role in the january 6th riot which seems significant and maybe we haven't seen that yet in any of the charging documents that strack ka's lawyers says prosecutors wanted to know about any coordination with trump or his cutouts. >> so we haven't seen that in the charges documents. but we have seen people who have been charged by the justice department say that they did what they did, they came to the capitol on january 6th, that they legally entered the building, destroyed property, et cetera, because they believed that donald trump wanted them to. so this is actually an idea that
5:27 pm
has been brought up by people who have been charged themselves. also keep in mind attorney general garland said they have not ruled out investigations of anybody related to january 6th and they are willing to investigate people even if they is not enter the capitol on that day. the department's already made good on that by charging the head of the oath keepers, stuart rhodes, with sedition. very notably, he did not actually enter with the capitol. he did not illegally enter or himself try to stop congress that day. if you look at the charging documents, the department says that he was a key player and sort of the mastermind behind the attack. >> harry, in terms of the individuals -- particularly the three lawyers, i think katie is correct to say that the odds of their cooperation are probably pretty low. we will see what happens. how do you think this plays out? >> all right. so they are low, but, look, they have a lot to lose, more than
5:28 pm
the average person. if they are held in contempt and it's sustained, it really is curtains for them professionally. now, i also want to second what katie said and say very roughly, january 6th and doj are about trying to align what we now know as being, you know, a are seditious conspiracy case to the oval office and that would be roughly speaking i think two conspiracies, one the kind of marginal group that is a bridge from trump to these folks, fundraising, et cetera. and so sidney powell, among others, represented michael powell and were beginning to inch into the michael powell/alex jones land. in any event, yes, i think they will come out talking tough. it's not clear to me that the committee really believes that they need their testimony, but they want to put down markers for the broader inquiry and
5:29 pm
there is a lot of possible charges they could be subject to criminal charges under what's become the kind of go-to crime, i think besides seditious conspiracy, and that is impeding an official proceeding under 1512. so they are looking at potential criminal referrals. >> katie and hayry, thank you both. i learned a lot. ahead, as the january 6th investigation moves through, donald trump's inner circle, what about the man at the center of it all. george conway after this. he manr of it all. of it all. george wconway after this. i felt all people saw were my uncontrolled movements. some mental health meds can cause tardive dyskinesia, or td, and itikely to improve without treatment. ingrezza is a prescription medicine to treat adults with td movements in the face and body. it's the only treatment for td that's one pill, once-daily, with or without food.
5:30 pm
ingrezza 80 mg is proven to reduce td movements in 7 out of 10 people. people taking ingrezza can stay on their current dose of most mental health meds. don't take ingrezza if you're allergic to any of its ingredients. ingrezza may cause serious side effects, including sleepiness. don't drive, operate heavy machinery, or do other dangerous activities until you know how ingrezza affects you. other serious side effects include potential heart rhythm problems and abnormal movements. it's nice people focus more on me. ask your doctor about ingrezza, #1 prescribed for td. learn how you could pay as little as zero dollars at amazing. jerry, you gotta to see this. seen it. trust me, after 15 walks... gets a little old. ugh you could wait... all night... for an email response from steve, who will sign back in at 9 am tomorrow morning. orrrr... you could find the answer right now in slack. and give steve a break.
5:31 pm
slack. where the future works. and givealeve-x. break. it's fast, powerful long-lasting relief with a revolutionary, rollerball design. because with the right pain reliever... life opens up. aleve it... and see what's possible. you don't get much time for yourself. so when you do, make it count with crest pro-health. it protects the 8 areas dentists check for a healthier mouth. the #1 toothpaste brand in america. crest.
5:32 pm
5:33 pm
when you attempt a coup, it tends to be a high-stakes, shoot the moon situation which you either are successful apwin power or you lose and bad things happen to you. you are prosecuted, arrested, put in jail or in many places much worse. none of that happened to donald trump, so he is out bopping
5:34 pm
around, planning the next one. >> we won this state. it's something that i contest, that i'll continue to contest. we were up by a massive amount at 10:00 in the evening and then all of a sudden things closed and it reopened and voila, look what happened. we have to be sharper the next time when it comes to counting the vote. there is a famous statement. sometimes the vote counter is more important than the candidate, and we can't let that ever, ever happen again. they have to get tougher and smarter. >> that was donald trump over the weekend before his arizona rally apparently quoting joseph stalin. on the importance of the republican party controlling the vote counter in this case in the state of pennsylvania. again he is a free man, he is able to do what he wants, say whatever he wants to whoever, anyone who will listen, there is a growing chorus of people who say there have to be criminal and legal consequences for what he plainly attempted. one of them is conservative lawyer george conway.
5:35 pm
he authored an opinion piece in "the washington post" arguing that the investigative road must lead prosecutors to the individual most responsible for the events of january 6th, foerm president donald trump. george conway joins me now. could you sort of lay out your case here for what you think should happen and why. >> well, it's not complicated. he needs to be investigated for any number of the charges of the sort that have been brought against others. i mean, the judge in the district of columbia called some. people he was sentencing the people who walked into the capitol on january 6th, broke into the capitol, he called them pawns. and where are the higher ups he was asking? well, they have gotten now with the oath keeper indictment last week, they've got ton maybe the bishops and the knights, but they got a ways to go. they need to go up, and because they were all there and they say this, these people, because of donald trump. donald trump started this all. he started it by lying about the
5:36 pm
election even before it happened, and he kept -- he was the one who basically told them to go up on capitol hill. and there are any number of theories he could be, you know, potentially held criminally liable for this stuff. i mean, harry litman, who you just had on, talked about 18 usc 1215-2, which is the perfect fit. it talks about, you know, criminalizes -- it says if somebody should go to jail for not more than 20 years if they corruptly object instruct, influence or impede any official proceeding, that close a proceeding of congress, and the judges in this district and the district of columbia have held that official proceeding of congress includes the january 6th counting of electoral voits for the joint session. the question is, did he try to obstruct, influence, conspire, obstruct or influence or impede that proceeding? yes. did he do it corruptly. let us count the ways.
5:37 pm
he lied his ass for two months about the election. that seems pretty corrupt. he tried to coerce his vice president into -- wouldn't you like to have the power not to count these votes and we will be re-elected? that seems pretty corrupt. you know, your colleague rachel maddow has been showing certificates that republicans prepared, fake electoral votes certificates and those were a linchpin of the memo that was presented to donald trump. you know, did he have something to do with those? did he know about those fake certificates? sounds pretty corrupt. and when you are dealing with donald trump, you ask if donald trump does -- did x, you are bound to ask the next question, which is did he do x corruptly. sometimes the answer is yes. it's a fair question to ask. and given the fact that he was trying to do here, whether he was going to corruptly or not or
5:38 pm
with an intent to incite violence or not, he was trying to end constitutional democracy in the united states, you know, which he was sworn to preserve, protect. there wasn't a greater crime committed by the president of the united states. the january 6th committee is all over that. i hope the justice department is working its way to that. i mean, it seems to me there should be, you know, execute the metaphor, a grand jury product owe logical exact from trump, all these efforts to stop the vote from being counted or delay it on january 6th, 2021. >> yeah, your point there, others have made this point. other people made similar points. basically, given what we know, it's in the public record, i mean, even you reading from the u.s. code there, based on what we know from news reports, revelations from the house
5:39 pm
select committee, the attorney general has a powerful justification into investigation into the president's inner circle. it seems like obviously there is sufficient evidence -- there is sufficient facts as a predicate for a criminal investigation of the individual that was, obviously, driving the whole thing and everyone can knows that. there is no real mystery about he was the one doing it. >> right. and he was the one doing it. and this is again, the gravest crime that a president could commit. if you don't at least look at this with the closest possible microscope, you know, you are basically saying that a president is completely above the law. this isn't about, you know, whether or not he spends money that wasn't appropriated from congress, which would be a big deal. this isn't about whether he, you know, made some argument about the interpretation of a law and pushed it one step too far. this is about the constitution basically being destroyed. and if the justice department
5:40 pm
doesn't use every available resource to look into whether or not that should be criminally prosecuted, it would be a travesty. and i think, you know, judge garland's speech last week said that they are not going to stop at any level. they are going to go and look at everybody. i think that's a fairway of interpreting it. i hope he gets to doing that. >> let me ask you, i have often wrestled with this. and you have written in other places about criminal liability the president is exposed to. "the new york times" investigative spees on his tax records based on actual documents implicate some pretty aggressive attack strategies, what some call fraud on its face. there is a criminal investigation in new york city district attorney's office. we think in fulton county, georgia, about the, i think, corrupt attempt to bull
5:41 pm
raffensperger. this is someone who has danced on the edge of the law and criminal conviction for a very long time. and is he just -- is he inordinately savvy to never quite do the thing, that smoking gun, or is he just protected now by the worry about norms, political ramification, institutional health of american democracy, if you try the former president. what is saving him right now, to your mind? >> i what saves him is the thing that always saved him. i think mary trump put it quite well in her book. there is always people around him ever since he was a child protecting him. and trying to keep him out of trouble and taking the blame for things that he does. and beyond that, there is the other thing that he does, is he does a lot of the stuff out in the open, which fools people into thinking, well, if this were really illegal and he
5:42 pm
were -- you know, if he had criminal intent, he wouldn't have been so open about it. but that's precisely what makes him so terrible. and exactly what shouldn't -- it should not protect him that he was more open about basically destroying constitutional democracy in the united states than maybe somebody else might have been and no president has ever done it before. >> it's a bizarrely effective alibi to constantly be just plotting in public and turn around and say, clearly, i wouldn't have just done this in front of you. >> there is also his state of mind. i mean, he is so seemingly crazy that when he says something that is just off the wall and false, you know, you kind of wonder. he is just nuts enough to believe some of this stuff. >> right. >> and the fact of the matter is, he gets d away with a lot because of that. >> george conway, thank you for
5:43 pm
your time tonight, sir. >> thanks. do you remember when the supreme court ruled covid is not an occupational hazard? next the supreme court justice who reportedly refused to wear a mask despite the health concerns of his own high-risk colleague. we'll be right back. we'll be right back. here we go... remember, mom's a kayak denier, so please don't bring it up. bring what up, kayak? excuse me? do the research, todd. listen to me, kayak searches hundreds of travel sites to find you great deals on flights, cars and hotels.
5:44 pm
they're lying to you! who's they? kayak? arr! open your eyes! compare hundreds of travel sites at once. kayak. search one and done.
5:45 pm
5:46 pm
5:47 pm
supreme court is probably one of the most leak-proof institutions of all of american government. when somebody comes out, it's a big deal. today we got a shocking story. it stems from this moment when the court returned to the bench for the first time since the holidays. as you can see, with omicron cases surging, all of the justices wearing masks over there on the right for neil gorsuch. also one justice was missing, sonia sotomayor, who participated virtually from her chambers. justice sotomayor has type 1 diabetes since childhood putting her at high risk if she is
5:48 pm
infected with covid-19. court sources said justice sotomayor did not feel safe in close proximity to people who were unmasked. chief justice john roberts understood that and, quote, asked the other justices to mask up. as you can see in the court sketch, justice gorsuch, who sits next to justice sotomayor, was the only one to refuse that request. npr reports gorsuch's continued refusal to wear a mask meant that justice sotomayor has not attended the justices weekly conferences in person, joining by telephone. you could say the lack of some sort of rule on wearing masks with chief justice roberts could have enforced on the court is an occupational hazard for justice sotomayor. it's changed her workplace. made it less safe. puts her health in danger at her place of work. it just so happens that the argument the court heard were about vaccine or testing mandates and whether the danger of catching covid counts as an
5:49 pm
occupational hazard. keep in mind, in addition to justice sotomayor participating remotely, two of the lawyers arguing for blocking the mandates were doing so by phone. why? because they tested positive for covid and the court thought probably shouldn't have positive covid people in the workplace. in the end, the majority, including justice gorsuch, ruled against the vaccine or testing requirement for large writing although covid is a risk that occurs in many workplaces, it is not an occupational, emphasized in italics, hazard. covid does spread at home, schools, sporting events and elsewhere people gather. well, okay, yeah, sure. sure teams like an occupational hazard for justice sotomayor, a person at high risk who sits next to a co-worker refused to wear a mask, asked to do her job, not like a sports game she couldn't attend. it's hazard for millions of
5:50 pm
americans. it stunt matter will the hazards exist beyond the workplace walls. justice gorsuch's deeply obnoxious behavior is one of many facets of this extremely right wing court at least bush gore this year. we have a great conversation about that on my podcast this week. it's a crossover episode with, why is this happening and the great court watching podcast strict scrutiny co-hosted by my wife. check it out. wife wife check it out thanks to's alerts we were able to see the newest homes on the market, super fast. so we could finally buy our first "big boi house." big boi house. big boi kitchen! big boi waterfall shower! big boi crawl space. big boi sold sign, big boi logo. to each their home.
5:51 pm
at fidelity, your dedicated advisor will work with you on a comprehensive wealth plan across your full financial picture. a plan with tax-smart investing strategies designed to help you keep more of what you earn. this is the planning effect. well, would you look at that? jerry, you gotta see this. seen it. trust me, after 15 walks... gets a little old. i really should be retired by now. wish i'd invested when i had the chance... to the moon! ugh. unbelievable. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪
5:52 pm
hey hun hey, get your own vapors relax with vicks vapobath or with vicks vaposhower. take a soothing vicks vapo moment wherever you chose. ♪ it wasn't me by shaggy ♪ you're never responsible for unauthorized purchases on your discover card. i've got moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. now, there's skyrizi. 3 out of 4 people achieved 90% clearer skin at 4 months, after just 2 doses. skyrizi may increase your risk of infections and lower your ability to fight them. before treatment, your doctor should check you for infections and tuberculosis. tell your doctor if you have an infection or symptoms such as fever, sweats, chills, muscle aches, or coughs or if you plan to or recently received a vaccine. ♪nothing is everything♪ talk to your dermatologist about skyrizi.
5:53 pm
learn how abbvie could help you save. talk to your dermatologist about skyrizi. when a truck hit my car, the insurance company wasn't fair. i didn't know what my case was worth. so i called the barnes firm. i was hit by a car and needed help. i called the barnes firm, that was the best call i could've made. i'm rich barnes. it's hard for people to know how much their accident case is worth. let our injury attorneys help you get the best result possible. ♪ the barnes firm injury attorneys ♪ ♪ call one eight hundred, eight million ♪
5:54 pm
the january 6 committee was issues subpoenaed to four more of trump's associates. the senate moved forward on efforts to protect the next election by starting debate on voting rights. none of the republicans support it. two democrats are unwilling to break the filibuster or change its rules to get votes rights passed. the leader of the senate promised to find another way around the impasse. >> if the senate cannot protect the right to vote, which cornerstone of our democracy, then the senate rules must be reformed. if the republicans block closure on the legislation before us, will put forward a propoal to change the rules to allow for a talking filibuster on this
5:55 pm
legislation. >> as senators continue debate at the capitol, i'm joined by senator tim kaine of virginia who finished his own speech in defense of voting rights on the senate floor. senator, what is happening right now? i've lost the thread. explain where we are. >> well, listen, chris, it's great to be with you. we have two fantastic voting rights bills to protect. people's voting rights and to restore the voting rights act of 1965. the good news is that we have all 50 senate democrats as strong supporters of both bills. they have been rolled into one. the bill is pending on the senate floor. the first debate, we have been able to have on the floor during entire time i've been in the senate. 50 votes without some thought about a rules reform will not be enough to pass it. the senate filibuster has evolved into this thing where if you don't have 60 votes, you
5:56 pm
can't get legislation passed. as you know, we have two democrats who say they won't change the filibuster rule. i have worked with people like amy klobuchar, chuck schumer and others. we have come up with a proposal that you do not need to abolish the filibuster or reform it. you just need to restore it to what it was during most of senate history. here is what it is. you are on a bill and we're on a bill now. you just keep debating until debate is over. nobody stands up to speak or everybody spoken twice under senate rule 19. at that point, it's by majority. we have got a majority with the vice president breaking the tie. we are not going to propose to terminate debate. we're not going to do that. joe manchin and kyrsten sinema say they don't want to abolish the filibuster. the only thing we're going to try to do is switch the filibuster from a secret,
5:57 pm
closed, clandestine into a talking, public filibuster. that will be the vote tomorrow. if joe and kyrsten sinema -- it should be public rather than private. say to the republicans who like the filibuster, vote that it should be public rather than private. we will see where they end up. if we can get it to be a public filibuster, then we will debate the bill until the debate winds down. at that point, it's a simple majority vote. all the democrats who co-sponsored will vote to it and we will pass it with the vice president. >> joe manchin in the past has said he favors some kind of change to make a talking filibuster. i'm not sure he wants to go along with this particular modification. i want to play you something he said today, which strikes me as the heart of this. how high are the stakes here? part of this we get caught in the rules reform because that's the thing blocking it. what are we talking about here? how big a deal is this?
5:58 pm
how important is this? he was asked a good question about the possibility of disenfranchisement, people not being able to vote. here is his response. take a listen. >> a lot of people are saying you are making it so they aren't able to vote? >> the laws is there. the rules are back. the government will stand behind them and make sure they have a right to vote. we have that. things they are talking about are in court. the courts have struck it down like in ohio they struck down gerrymandering. things are happening. we act like we're going to obstruct people from voting. that's not going to happen. >> what do you think about that? >> well, chris, joe and i are longtime friends. we were governors together. i have been in numerous meetings with joe where his colleagues who are close friends, john tester, have looked him in the eye and say, you may not be worried in west virginia, but in montana, there are erecting discriminatory voter i.d.
5:59 pm
requirements to make it harder for younger people and members of indian tribes to vote, tribal nations to vote. that's going to hurt me. in georgia, they're hurting the ability of our folks to vote. i have had numerous colleagues tell him to his face, i don't know about west virginia, but let me tell you about my state. i'm puzzled when i hear joe say he is not worried about disenfranchisement when his own colleagues who were his friends tell him, this is the difference between not only whether i win or lose but whether it's even worthwhile to run. this is a clear and present danger that -- i get it when trump and the gop members try to say, there's nothing going on here, ignore the man behind the curtain. i'm troubled when joe is in the room with his colleagues who are telling this is problems for them and he is acting like there aren't any problems out there.
6:00 pm
>> i think we should note a little context here. a lot of the rules that are being changed in states like georgia, formerly would have to go through a national process called the voting rights act, which has been gutted by the supreme court, which had -- you can't overemphasize the fact that we had solved the problem beforehand about how to deal with the fact that you want states to have some local control over municipalities have local control but also federal standards and to make sure the still is not being abused. we had that. the roberts court struck it down. republicans refused to reinstate it. now we are here. senator tim kaine, thank you for your time tonight. >> it's going to be an important day tomorrow. i'm excited about it. >> we will keep our eyes on it. that is "all in" on this tuesday night. thank you very much. thanks to you at home for joining us.


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on