-
Playlist
Playlist
-
Full Episodes
Full Episodes
The Rachel Maddow Show
Now playing
Thursday, 04/19/18Watch the full episode of Thursday night's The Rachel Maddow Show.
-
- Information
-
- Information
-
- Information
-
- Information
-
-
comments
Rachel Maddow StoriesRSS
Why the GOP's failure over the Comey memos seems so familiar
House Republicans fought for months to obtain memos then-FBI Director James Comey wrote about his interactions with Donald Trump. The Justice Department resisted for obvious reasons: the memos are evidence in an ongoing federal investigation, and law enforcement officials aren't in the habit of handing over such evidence to outside parties, especially not to satisfy a partisan political agenda.
But GOP lawmakers, desperate to help Trump, pressed on. After making all kinds of heated threats, Republicans eventually obtained the documents, promptly leaked them, and proceeded to pat themselves on the back.
House Republicans have declared that the James Comey memos they released Thursday disprove that President Trump obstructed justice in his interactions with the former FBI director. And Trump spiked the football, too....
But if anything, the memos only confirm Comey's version of events. And the new details only raise more questions about the infamous Steele dossier and Michael Flynn.... You have a president who can't stop talking about the dossier. And you have a White House that's suspicious about Flynn -- before he ultimately resigned. Those revelations don't help the president; they hurt him.
Or as NBC News' Chuck Todd put it this morning, "What exactly were House Republicans hoping to accomplish by demanding the full release of these memos? Nothing I've read seems to change Comey's story and if anything, these memos give more, not less, credence to the dossier."
Quite right. Republicans fought tooth and nail, ignoring every warning, to get their hands on these documents. They then shared them with the world, only to find that they haven't helped their president or their party in any meaningful way. In fact, the GOP architects of this misguided plan -- House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.), House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.), and House Intelligence Committee Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) -- appear worse off than they were before.
All of which leads to two points.
Friday's Campaign Round-Up, 4.20.18
Today's installment of campaign-related news items from across the country.
* In a bit of a surprise, the Democratic National Committee this morning filed a multi-million-dollar lawsuit against the Russian government, Donald Trump's campaign, and WikiLeaks, alleging their coordination to disrupt the 2016 campaign. This civil suit is on a separate legal track from Special Counsel Robert Mueller's investigation.
* Rep. Ron DeSantis, a Republican gubernatorial candidate in Florida who's enjoyed support from Donald Trump, was confronted with a new ethics complaint this week following reports that he rented a condo "from campaign donors who are executives at a defense contractor that lobbies the federal government."
* Illinois' gubernatorial race just got a little more complicated, with state Sen. Sam McCann (R) kicking off a third-party bid for Illinois' highest office. The Republican state lawmaker is apparently describing himself as an "independent conservative," who may further undermine Gov. Bruce Rauner's (R) chances for a second term.
* McClatchy reported this week that Trump-owned businesses "have received at least $15.1 million in revenue from political groups and federal agencies since 2015." The bulk of the revenue was spent by Trump's own campaign.
* With Blake Farenthold recently having resigned from Congress, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) is apparently eager to hold a special election to fill the vacancy. Roll Call reported, "Abbott sent a letter Thursday to Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton outlining his desire to hold a special election soon and asking what laws he could bypass to speed up the process."
* In Pennsylvania, which will have a less-Republican-friendly congressional map this year following a state Supreme Court ruling, the latest Muhlenberg/Morning Call poll found Democrats leading Republicans on the generic ballot, 47% to 38%.
Trump used alter ego to exaggerate his financial wealth
It was a little embarrassing for Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross last fall when the public saw reports that he may have lied about his net worth. Apparently, over the course of several years, Ross wildly exaggerated his finances because he wanted to be seen as a billionaire on the Forbes 400 list.
Ross was ultimately removed from the list altogether when the publication determined that Ross had "lied" to the magazine, and the "fibs, exaggerations, omissions, fabrications and whoppers" went on for quite a while.
But as it turns out, he's not the only member of the Trump administration who was concerned about the Forbes 400 list -- because Ross' boss ran into some trouble of his own. Jonathan Greenberg wrote this gem for the Washington Post.
In May 1984, an official from the Trump Organization called to tell me how rich Donald J. Trump was. I was reporting for the Forbes 400, the magazine's annual ranking of America's richest people, for the third year. In the previous edition, we'd valued Trump's holdings at $200 million, only one-fifth of what he claimed to own in our interviews. This time, his aide urged me on the phone, I needed to understand just how loaded Trump really was.
The official was John Barron -- a name we now know as an alter ego of Trump himself. When I recently rediscovered and listened, for first time since that year, to the tapes I made of this and other phone calls, I was amazed that I didn't see through the ruse: Although Trump altered some cadences and affected a slightly stronger New York accent, it was clearly him. "Barron" told me that Trump had taken possession of the business he ran with his father, Fred. "Most of the assets have been consolidated to Mr. Trump," he said. "You have down Fred Trump [as half owner] ... but I think you can really use Donald Trump now." Trump, through this sockpuppet, was telling me he owned "in excess of 90 percent" of his family's business. With all the home runs Trump was hitting in real estate, Barron told me, he should be called a billionaire.
But as Greenberg documented, Trump, through his alter ego, wasn't telling the truth, and he wasn't a billionaire, at least not at the time.
To a very real extent, an article like this checks several boxes. Trump is insecure about his wealth? Check. Trump likes to make up people, pretends to be those people, and says nice things about himself to the press? Check. Trump combines narcissism and dishonesty in ways that get a little creepy? Check.
Republican tax plan delivers massive rewards for Wall Street
If you were one of those Americans who argued last year, "Wall Street giants deserve a massive tax break because they don't appear to have nearly enough money," the Associated Press had some news today that should make you feel much better.
An analysis by The Associated Press shows the nation's six big Wall Street banks saved at least $3.59 billion in taxes last quarter, thanks to the recently enacted Trump tax law.
Banks typically kick off the earnings season, and their reports for the January-March quarter are giving investors and the public their first glimpse into how the new tax law is impacting Corporate America. Banks historically paid some of the highest taxes, due to their U.S.-centric business model. Before the Trump tax cuts, these banks paid between 28 to 31 percent of their income each year in corporate taxes.
The results show why banks supported the tax overhaul. Tax rates at banks such as JPMorgan Chase, Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley dropped to between 17 and 23 percent.
This is a feature, not a bug, of the Republican tax plan. One of the points of the tax breaks was to deliver a windfall to financial giants that didn't need the money.
All of which reminds me of a secretary in Pennsylvania whom House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) was briefly eager to talk about.
Rubio's argument on presidential 'deference' starts to unravel
After Donald Trump nominated Jim Bridenstine to lead NASA, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) had the right instincts and opposed the nomination. Bridenstine was obviously unqualified, and the Republican senator said it "could be devastating for the space program" if the far-right Oklahoma congressman led the agency.
And then Rubio changed his mind and helped confirm Bridenstine to the post. Yesterday on the Senate floor, he explained why.
"My view of it is ... that we give great deference to the president on choosing qualifications. It is my view that, the more important the job, the more discretion the president deserves."
This is a terrible argument. The more important a position, the more the Senate should rubber-stamp a president's nominee? The significance of the Senate's advise-and-consent role is diminished when members are considering nominees of great import? All of this seems entirely backwards.
In fact, at a certain level, Rubio knows how absurd this is -- because he made the opposite argument last year:
"My view is that the president deserves wide latitude in their nominations, but the more important the position is, the less latitude they have."
Complicating matters, of course, is the fact that Rubio reflexively opposed many of Barack Obama's nominees for cabinet and other high-ranking posts -- even when the Floridian knew they'd be confirmed anyway -- because he had no interest in presidential "deference" or "discretion."
Cruz tries to sing the praises of the president who bullied him
Sen. Ted Cruz's (R-Texas) relationship with Donald Trump has been difficult at times. After all, Trump has gone after Cruz's wife and suggested Cruz's father played a role in the JFK assassination.
For his part, the Republican senator has told Americans that Trump is a “pathological liar,” a “bully,” a “narcissist,” “utterly amoral,” and my personal favorite, a “sniveling coward.”
It was therefore of interest when Time magazine named the president one of the most influential people of the year, and the editors turned to Cruz to sing Trump's praises. This is what the Texan came up with:
President Trump is a flash-bang grenade thrown into Washington by the forgotten men and women of America. The fact that his first year as Commander in Chief disoriented and distressed members of the media and political establishment is not a bug but a feature.
The same cultural safe spaces that blinkered coastal elites to candidate Trump's popularity have rendered them blind to President Trump's achievements on behalf of ordinary Americans. While pundits obsessed over tweets, he worked with Congress to cut taxes for struggling families. While wealthy celebrities announced that they would flee the country, he fought to bring back jobs and industries to our shores. While talking heads predicted Armageddon, President Trump's strong stand against North Korea put Kim Jong Un back on his heels.
President Trump is doing what he was elected to do: disrupt the status quo. That scares the heck out of those who have controlled Washington for decades, but for millions of Americans, their confusion is great fun to watch.
Not surprisingly, Cruz has received quite a bit of mockery for having written this. He could've told Time that he isn't interested in praising a president who went after his family, but instead, Cruz played the role of loyal partisan soldier and celebrated Trump's efforts.
But what struck me as especially interesting was how, exactly, Cruz hailed Trump.
Rachel Maddow interviews James Comey: Read the full transcript
If you missed Rachel's interview with former FBI Director James Comey, we've published several video clips from the show, but just as importantly, we've also published the full transcript:
RACHEL MADDOW, MSNBC: So, it is fortuitous timing that the man who wrote these memos is our guest tonight. I’m very much looking forward to asking him about that and everything else under the sun.
James Comey has been a lifelong public servant and law enforcement professional. He served as a federal prosecutor in the Eastern District of Virginia and Southern District of New York where he rose to become U.S. attorney in the Southern District. He then became deputy attorney general of the United States and then director of the FBI.
At this point, he expected to be about halfway through the normal ten-year term for an FBI director, but President Trump fired him in May. Mr. Comey has now written a book about his time in public life and his views of ethical leadership. It is driving everybody absolutely crazy up to and including the president. It’s called "A Higher Loyalty: Truth, Lies and Leadership."
Director Comey, it's really nice to meet you. Thanks for being here.
JAMES COMEY, FORMER FBI DIRECTOR: It’s great to meet you. Great to be here.
MADDOW: Thank you for timing this whole thing, so the memos came out just before you sat down.
COMEY: I had no idea.
MADDOW: Yes. And I haven't actually had a chance to read what they have released. I can tell you how they start. What follows are notes I typed in the vehicle immediately upon exiting Trump Tower on 1-6-17, although I wrote this in less than five minutes after the meeting and I have tried to use actual words spoken, including quoting directly in some places. I have not used quotation marks throughout because my purpose was to capture the substance of what was said. I’m not sure of the proper classification here, so have chosen secret. Please let me know if it should be higher or lower than that.
Do you recognize those as your words?
House Republicans obtain, quickly leak Comey memos
In January, the Washington Post published a piece documenting the many ways in which congressional Republicans appeared to be conspiring to "discredit" the Russia investigation. The newspaper has updated that reporting more than once, including again this week.
And while the Post has clearly raised an important point, rooted in fact, the observation is also incomplete -- because congressional Republicans aren't just trying to undermine public confidence in the investigation; they're also taking deliberate steps to interfere with the ongoing federal probe.
For example, after the public learned about the existence of memos then-FBI Director James Comey wrote about his interactions with Donald Trump, congressional Republicans began demanding full copies of the materials. The Justice Department resisted for obvious reasons: the memos are evidence in an ongoing federal investigation, and law enforcement officials aren't in the habit of handing over such evidence to outside parties, especially not to satisfy a partisan political agenda.
But GOP lawmakers didn't care. The more the Justice Department declined, the more House Republicans demanded the materials, pressuring top law enforcement officials, no matter the costs. Yesterday, left with few options, the Justice Department relented.
Unredacted copies of the Comey memos were to be made available to members of Congress Friday at secure facilities at the Capitol. The Justice Department's decision to turn them over to lawmakers came just days after Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein wrote to the Republican chairmen of the House Oversight, Intelligence and Judiciary Committees expressing concern that providing them could affect an ongoing criminal investigation.
It took very little time before unknown members of Congress leaked the evidence to the Associated Press, which was almost certainly the point all along. No serious observer has even tried to make the case that Republicans demanded the materials as part of some kind of exercise in oversight; this was always about GOP lawmakers looking for ways to undermine the investigation itself.
Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein specifically told lawmakers recently that he was concerned about Congress "publicizing" sensitive materials. Republicans have only helped prove him right.
Trump's legal team adds Giuliani, moves in an odd direction
To hear Donald Trump tell it, "many lawyers and top law firms" are eager to represent him in the Russia case. It's difficult to believe the presidential boast, of course, given the number of prominent attorneys who've rejected Trump's overtures.
Nevertheless, the president's efforts to find someone, anyone, willing to join his legal defense team have finally paid off -- sort of.
Former New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani is joining President Donald Trump's legal team, providing advice on how to deal with the special counsel's investigation into Russian interference into the 2016 election, attorney Jay Sekulow confirmed to NBC News on Thursday.
"Rudy is great," Trump said, according to a statement provided by Sekulow, a member of the president's personal legal team dealing with the Russia probe. "He has been my friend for a long time and wants to get this matter quickly resolved for the good of the country."
Of course, from a different perspective, Special Counsel Robert Mueller's investigation must continue until its completion "for the good of the country."
Up until yesterday, Trump's legal team effectively consisted of Ty Cobb and Jay Sekulow, but they'll apparently now work alongside Giuliani -- the former New York City mayor whom Trump had previously asked to advise the White House on cybersecurity issues. (There's no evidence Giuliani ever did any meaningful work with the president on this issue.)
They'll be joined by Jane Serene Raskin and Marty Raskin, who manage a Florida-based law firm, and who are former federal prosecutors.
None of Trump's new lawyers has extensive experience as defense attorneys, which would appear to be what the president needs given the circumstances.
Of particular interest, though, is the timeframe Giuliani has in mind for the future of the investigation.
Pages
About The Rachel Maddow Show
Launched in 2008, “The Rachel Maddow Show” follows the machinations of policy making in America, from local political activism to international diplomacy. Rachel Maddow looks past the distractions of political theater and stunts and focuses on the legislative proposals and policies that shape American life - as well as the people making and influencing those policies and their ultimate outcome, intended or otherwise.
