The Rachel Maddow Show Weekdays at 9PM

Help

... more Duration: {{video.duration.momentjs}}

Rachel Maddow StoriesRSS

select from:

E.g., 4/29/2017
E.g., 4/29/2017
Image: US President Donald J. Trump participates in a health care discussion with House Energy and Commerce Chairman Greg Walden and House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Kevin Brady

When a president simply lies too much

03/22/17 08:46AM

The funny thing about Donald Trump's wiretap conspiracy theory is that, from the outset, everyone knew he was lying. The sitting president accused his predecessor of ordering an illegal surveillance operation, as part of a Watergate-like scheme, and nearly the entire political world quickly reached a consensus: these claims are clearly not rooted in reality.

As Trump's falsehoods go, these were hardly the most dramatic -- indeed, they're not even the most shocking lie he's told about Barack Obama -- and it didn't take long before the claims were discredited in bipartisan fashion. But there was something about this lie that gained traction in ways most of Trump's other lies don't. Apparently, when a sitting president makes demonstrably false claims about his predecessor committing a felony, many are inclined to believe there should be some kind of consequences for dishonesty at this level.

Making matters much worse, when FBI Director James Comey testified before the House Intelligence Committee on Monday, confirming an investigation into the Trump campaign and further debunking Trump's wiretap conspiracy theory, the president used his official White House Twitter account to make a variety of related claims, each of which was plainly untrue.

The same day, the White House tried to tell the public that Trump's former campaign chairman and National Security Advisor were unimportant, peripheral figures.

And as a result, the bough is breaking. Discussions of the president's uncontrollable dishonesty are becoming more open, more explicit, less guarded, and more widespread. Take, for example, this new editorial from the Wall Street Journal, which argued that Trump's falsehoods "are eroding public trust, at home and abroad."
If President Trump announces that North Korea launched a missile that landed within 100 miles of Hawaii, would most Americans believe him? Would the rest of the world? We're not sure, which speaks to the damage that Mr. Trump is doing to his Presidency with his seemingly endless stream of exaggerations, evidence-free accusations, implausible denials and other falsehoods. [...]

Two months into his Presidency, Gallup has Mr. Trump's approval rating at 39%. No doubt Mr. Trump considers that fake news, but if he doesn't show more respect for the truth most Americans may conclude he's a fake President.
In case this isn't widely known, let's note for the record that the Wall Street Journal's editorial page is one of the most Republican-friendly pieces of real estate in all of national print media. When it calls out a GOP president's mendacity in such a direct way, it's emblematic of a change in perceptions about Trump's presidency.
read more

Image: Neil Gorsuch speaks after U.S. President Donald Trump announces his nomination of Gorsuch to be an associate justice of the U.S. Supreme Court at the White House in Washington

FBI probe into Team Trump casts cloud over Supreme Court process

03/22/17 08:00AM

On Monday, FBI Director James Comey publicly confirmed that there's a counter-espionage investigation underway, examining not only Russia's illegal efforts to help put Donald Trump in the White House, but also whether Team Trump cooperated with Moscow's scheme. On Tuesday, the confirmation hearing for Donald Trump's Supreme Court nominee, Neil Gorsuch, began in earnest.

Much of the political world is treating these two developments as distinct and unrelated. It was heartening to see Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) take the obvious step of connecting then. The Washington Post reported:
"I'd like to point out that it is the height of irony that Republicans held this Supreme Court seat open for nearly a calendar year while President Obama was in office, but are now rushing to fill the seat for a president whose campaign is under investigation by the FBI," Schumer said, according to remarks sent out by his office.

Schumer said that, to him, it appeared "unseemly to be moving forward so fast on confirming a Supreme Court Justice with a lifetime appointment" due to the looming FBI investigation, which could potentially last for months or years.
The Democratic leader added, "You can bet that if the shoe was on the other foot -- and a Democratic president was under investigation by the FBI -- that Republicans would be howling at the moon about filling a Supreme Court seat in such circumstances. After all, they stopped a president who wasn't under investigation from filling a seat with nearly a year left in his presidency."

I don't imagine any fair-minded observer would disagree with this assessment. Donald Trump not only received far fewer votes than his opponent, making it difficult for him to claim that he has a mandate to push a far-right conservative onto the high court, his campaign also may have colluded with a foreign adversary during an attack on our presidential election -- an attack that elevated Trump into the Oval Office.

If the partisan dynamic were flipped, we can say with some certainty that Republicans would demand that the FBI investigation be resolved before the president's Supreme Court nominee is considered for a lifetime appointment. Given the unprecedented GOP abuses surrounding the Merrick Garland nomination, the high court vacancy is itself of dubious legitimacy, but the FBI's probe raises questions anew about the legitimacy of the president trying to fill that vacancy.

So why not wait until the questions have answers?
read more

Tuesday's Mini-Report, 3.21.17

03/21/17 05:30PM

Today's edition of quick hits:

* Confirmation hearings begin in earnest: "Donald Trump's Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch began the second day of his confirmation hearing by stating that the Roe v. Wade precedent 'has been reaffirmed many times,' and telling the Senate Judiciary Committee that the question of whether he could rule against Trump was a 'softball.'"

* National security: "The new electronic device cabin restrictions on certain flights inbound to the United States from 10 overseas airports in the Muslim world were not prompted by a specific, newly-discovered threat, multiple U.S. officials told NBC News."

* I don't imagine the president will be tweeting this one: "For the first time since the election, markets are doubting they will get the pro-growth policies of tax reform and stimulus promised by President Donald Trump and the Republican Congress."

* Following up on Rachel's report from last night: "Secretary of State Rex Tillerson plans to skip a semiannual meeting of NATO foreign ministers this spring and will instead travel to a Group of 7 meeting of top diplomats in Italy and then to Russia."

* Paul Manafort remains in the news: "A Ukrainian lawmaker released new financial documents Tuesday allegedly showing that a former campaign chairman for President Trump laundered payments from the party of a disgraced ex-leader of Ukraine using offshore accounts in Belize and Kyrgyzstan."
read more

Ivanka Trump, right, listens as her father Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump delivers a policy speech on child care, Sept. 13, 2016, in Aston, Pa. (Photo by Evan Vucci/AP)

Ivanka Trump gains unprecedented new powers in the White House

03/21/17 04:52PM

Shortly after the election, there were multiple reports about Donald Trump seeking security clearance for his adult children. Soon after, the president quickly knocked those reports down, saying via Twitter, "I am not trying to get 'top level security clearance' for my children. This was a typically false news story."

Four months later, however, the story has apparently changed for at least one of the Trump kids. Politico reported:
Ivanka Trump, who moved to Washington saying she would play no formal role in her father's administration, is now officially setting up shop in the White House.

The powerful first daughter has secured her own office on the West Wing's second floor -- a space next to senior adviser Dina Powell, who was recently promoted to a position on the National Security Council. She is also in the process of obtaining a security clearance and is set to receive government-issued communications devices this week.
Even by Trump standards, it's hard to know what to make of a story like this. Ivanka Trump won't get a paycheck, but she will get classified information. She won't have a White House position, but she will have an office in the West Wing.

As is often the case with this administration, there's no real precedent for this. Americans have seen the president's adult kids adopting ceremonial roles, but Ivanka Trump is participating in meetings with foreign leaders -- literally sitting next to Canada's Justin Trudeau and Germany's Angela Merkel during recent White House discussions -- and tackling a policy portfolio.

She'll answer to no one but her father, and will get around nepotism laws by not having an official paid position.

I've long assumed that Ivanka Trump would have special access to the president, but this job-that-isn't-exactly-a-job is something else. It's ... odd.
read more

President-elect Donald Trump and his wife Melania Trump walk with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Ky. on Capitol Hill, Nov. 10, 2016, in Washington, D.C. (Photo by Alex Brandon/AP)

Republicans can't defend their health care bill on the merits

03/21/17 03:39PM

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) issued a warning to his Republican colleagues today, arguing that GOP lawmakers must support the party's health care plan because Republicans made a "commitment" to voters to repeal the Affordable Care Act.

He didn't talk about the bill's merits, or what he believes it would do to help Americans, but rather, McConnell's focus was on the political calculus. It's a classic example of a logical fallacy:

1. We have to do something.
2. This bill is something.
3. We therefore have to pass this bill.

Similarly, Donald Trump was in Louisville last night, headlining a campaign-style rally, where he touted his party's health care bill, again without actually describing any of its effects or purported benefits. Politico reported that the president is "increasingly talking about health care like the vegetables of his agenda -- the thing he must begrudgingly finish in order to get to what he really wants: tax cuts, trade deals and infrastructure."

NBC News reported that Trump took a similar message to congressional Republicans this morning on Capitol Hill.
President Donald Trump told House Republicans Tuesday that they could lose re-election in the 2018 midterms if they vote against the GOP health care bill later this week that would undo much of Obamacare.

Trying to help wrangle enough votes for passage, Trump went to Capitol Hill to meet privately with Republican lawmakers and said they are putting the GOP majority at risk with opposition to the bill, pushed by Speaker Paul Ryan.
We can certainly have a credible debate about Trump's assessment. In his mind, if the American Health Care Act goes down, Republican incumbents will suffer at the ballot box next year. As I see it, the risk is far greater for GOP members who vote for a wildly unpopular bill that's likely to die in the Senate anyway.

But the point here is that the argument itself is detached from what really matters: whether this legislation is a worthwhile policy prescription.
read more

Image: Neil Gorsuch

Gorsuch nomination creates important test for Senate Democrats

03/21/17 12:55PM

When Judge Neil Gorsuch arrived in the Senate yesterday to begin his Supreme Court confirmation process, there was a little news before the nominee even sat down. Sen. Michael Bennet (D) of Gorsuch's home state of Colorado joined the nominee and graciously introduced him to the Senate Judiciary Committee.

It's the sort of thing a senator ordinarily does when he or she supports a nomination, which meant Bennet was already undermining Democratic opposition to Donald Trump's high court nominee before the process had even begun in earnest. Roll Call reported:
...Bennet did not say if he would support Gorsuch for the high court, telling the committee, "I am keeping an open mind on this nomination."

His introduction did highlight what he saw as two clouds hanging over the proceedings, which the committee's Democrats also acknowledged. The first is the Republicans' refusal to hold a hearing or a vote on President Barack Obama's nominee to fill the vacancy, Judge Merrick Garland.

Bennet said it was tempting to deny Gorsuch a fair hearing, but, "Two wrongs never make a right."
That's an interesting principle, actually. Under normal circumstances, it's fairly compelling to think powerful policymakers should act in a mature and responsible fashion, steering clear of pettiness and needlessly cheap efforts to score partisan points. Many understandably grow weary of "tit-for-tat" schemes.

But I have a few straightforward follow-up questions for the Democratic senator: two wrongs may not make a right, but what does? Given the circumstances, what's just in this situation? How will rewarding Republican maximalist tactics move us any closer to what's "right"?
read more

Tuesday's Campaign Round-Up, 3.21.17

03/21/17 12:00PM

Today's installment of campaign-related news items from across the country.

* With many House Republicans worried about losing if they support an unpopular and regressive health care plan, Donald Trump reportedly told GOP lawmakers this morning, "I honestly think many of you will lose your seats in 2018 if you don't get this done."

* At a campaign-style rally in Louisville last night, Trump also talked once again about his electoral-vote totals, and because he remains stuck in 2016, the president also talked about NFL quarterback Colin Kaepernick kneeling during the national anthem last fall.

* I can't vouch for the reliability of the survey, but Clout Research released a poll yesterday in Georgia's 6th congressional district showing Jon Ossoff (D) in a very strong position ahead of next month's congressional special election. The first round is scheduled for April 18.

* USA Today reports that organizers of January's Women's March on Washington and leaders of Indivisible "will make presentations later this week to the Democracy Alliance when the influential donor coalition holds its private spring meeting in Washington, the group's president Gara LaMarche said."

* Minnesota Lt. Gov. Tina Smith (D) surprised many in state politics when she announced on Friday that she won't run for governor in 2018.

* Joe Piscopo, a "Saturday Night Live" actor in the 1980s, has decided not to seek the Republican gubernatorial nomination in New Jersey, but he's moving forward with plans to run as an independent. Piscopo, a former Democrat, backed Donald Trump's campaign last year.

* The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee raised $3.8 million in February, short of the $5.1 million raised by its Republican counterparts over the same period.
read more

The dome of the U.S. Capitol Building is reflected in a puddle on a rainy morning in Washington.

Republicans hope the 'Buffalo Bribe' can make a difference

03/21/17 11:09AM

How concerned are congressional Republican leaders about dragging their health care bill across the finish line? Enough to start adding last-minute sweeteners intended to buy off specific on-the-fence members. The New York Times reported overnight:
House Republican leaders, trying to lock down the votes of wavering upstate New York Republicans, inserted a last-minute special provision in their health care bill that would shift Medicaid costs from New York's counties to its state government.

The move -- one of a number of late changes designed to gain more votes -- would affect New York State only. It could save county governments outside of New York City $2.3 billion a year. But it could shift costs to state taxpayers or deny New York that same total in matching federal aid if the state continues to require those counties to contribute to the cost of Medicaid.
Not surprisingly, New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) isn't pleased, saying in a statement last night, "The more we learn about the repeal and replacement for the Affordable Care Act, the sicker New York gets." The Democratic governor is reportedly rushing to D.C. today to meet with the state's congressional delegation, explaining to them that this one new provision -- which some have labeled the "Buffalo Bribe," or the "Buffalo Buyout" -- would create a multi-billion-dollar hole in New York's state budget.

So why add it? Because many upstate Republicans believe New York's existing Medicaid policy adds a significant tax burden in their area. GOP leaders on Capitol Hill inserted language into the American Health Care Act last night that's likely to make Reps. Chris Collins (R-N.Y.), Claudia Tierney (R-N.Y.), Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.), John Faso (R-N.Y.), and John Katko (R-N.Y.) happy -- or at least happier -- and given how narrow the margins are likely to be on Thursday, every vote counts.

But let's also take a moment to pause and appreciate just how breathtaking the hypocrisy is.
read more

Image: White House Chief of Staff Reince Priebus speaks at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in National Harbor, Maryland

Reince Priebus' FBI contacts suddenly look even worse

03/21/17 10:19AM

When there's a major development in an ongoing controversy, it's important to consider the news at face value, but it's also important to reconsider previous details in light of new evidence.

Take White House Chief of Staff Reince Priebus' communications with the FBI, for example.

We learned about a month ago that Priebus spoke with FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe about Team Trump's Russia scandal, and by some accounts, the White House chief of staff hoped to persuade FBI officials to reach out to journalists to downplay the significance of the controversy.

As we discussed at the time, there are rules in place that severely limit the communications between the FBI and the White House, though in this case, Reince Priebus either didn't know or didn't care about those restrictions. Politico had a report over the weekend -- before yesterday's testimony from FBI Director James Comey, obviously -- about the communications.
Reince Priebus's request that the FBI refute a report of Donald Trump associates' contacts with Russian intelligence appears to have violated the White House's policy restricting political interference in pending investigations, according to a copy of the policy obtained by POLITICO.

The policy says only the president, vice president and White House counsel can discuss specific investigations or cases with the attorney general, deputy attorney general, associate attorney general or solicitor general. Any other conversations require the approval of the White House counsel, according to the document.
In other words, Priebus' chats with the deputy director of the FBI -- communications that the White House has already acknowledged -- were problematic on their face.

But in light of yesterday's news, they seem quite a bit worse.
read more

President-elect Donald Trump arrives at a rally at the Crown Coliseum in Fayetteville, N.C., Dec. 6, 2016. (Photo by Andrew Harnik/AP)

Trump picks the wrong slogan: 'Promises made, promises kept'

03/21/17 09:20AM

Donald Trump held the latest in a series of presidential rallies last night in Louisville, where he pretended the FBI director hadn't just told the world that Trump campaign operation is under investigation for its ties to Russia. The New York Times noted that the event included the unveiling of a new slogan.
For Mr. Trump, who is enduring one of the most difficult stretches of his young presidency, the rally was a chance to bathe in the adulation of a campaign crowd, a sea of people waving placards that said: "Buy American. Hire American" and "Promises Made. Promises Kept."
Those placards weren't the result of organic, grassroots enthusiasm; they were part of a specific push from Team Trump, which apparently finds the phrase compelling.

And at a certain level, it's easy to understand the motivation. The more the White House struggles and Trump's approval rating sinks, the more the president and his aides stick to the idea that they're simply following through on the platform presented to voters during the 2016 campaign. Love Trump or hate him, the argument goes, he's simply keeping the promises he made before he was elected.

The problem, of course, is that this isn't even close to being true.
read more

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.

MaddowBlog_Appendix_logo

#Maddow

Latest Book