The Rachel Maddow Show Weekdays at 9PM

Help

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

Rachel Maddow StoriesRSS

select from:

E.g., 11/22/2017
E.g., 11/22/2017
NFL players wait to be introduced to the crowd before playing in a game. (Photo by Mike Blake/Reuters)

Trump takes an interest in the NFL's 'massive tax breaks'

10/11/17 10:07AM

Donald Trump recently decided it'd be a good idea to expand the nation's culture wars to include athletes who engage in civil-rights protests. Yesterday, as the Washington Post reported, the president took the conversation in a very specific direction.

President Trump on Tuesday escalated his tirades against the NFL in an ongoing controversy over players who kneel to protest racial injustice, questioning tax breaks for professional football and attacking an ESPN commentator who has been critical of him and the league.

"Why is the NFL getting massive tax breaks while at the same time disrespecting our Anthem, Flag and Country? Change tax law!," Trump wrote in an early morning tweet.

As a rule, I don't much care about the eagerness with which the president wants to feud with athletes who hurt his feelings -- though he really should have better things to do with his time -- but Trump's tweet got me thinking. Just what kind of "massive tax breaks" do professional football teams actually enjoy?

read more

Image: US President Donald J. Trump hosts former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger

The lies Donald Trump likes a little too much

10/11/17 09:20AM

It's not exactly a secret that Donald Trump tells a staggering number of lies on a nearly daily basis, but I'm especially interested in the ones he returns to, over and over again, even after being told he's wrong.

In this week's interview with Forbes, for example, the president boasted, "I've had just about the most legislation passed of any president, in a nine-month period, that's ever served. We had over 50 bills passed. I'm not talking about executive orders only, which are very important. I'm talking about bills."

This is, of course, demonstrably ridiculous, as Trump surely knows. But there's a rationale behind the lie: the president is embarrassed by his failures, and he can't explain his lack of accomplishments, so he's made up a legislative record that exists only in his imagination.

Similarly, Trump needs a rationale to sell his plan for massive tax cuts. The truth won't do, so as Politico noted, the president is clinging to a specific lie.

"We are the highest taxed nation in the world," President Donald Trump has repeated over and over again.

He said it Tuesday during a meeting with former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger. He said it at a White House event last Friday. He's tweeted it, repeated it in television interviews and declared it at countless rallies. It is his go-to talking point, his favorite line as he tries to lead the Republican Party to a once-in-a-generation overhaul of the federal tax code.

Despite the repetition, the claim is plainly untrue. Indeed, as the president almost certainly realizes, it's not even close to being accurate. Asked for an explanation yesterday, White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said some other claim that Trump didn't say is true, so there's no need to dwell on the president's bogus argument.

When a reporter noted that this doesn't explain why Trump keeps lying, Sanders responded, "Sorry, we're just going to have to agree to disagree." She then moved on.

The significance of this extends beyond the president's truth allergy. There's a more substantive angle to keep in mind.

read more

Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton walks off the stage as Republican nominee Donald Trump remains at his podium after their third and final 2016 presidential campaign debate in Las Vegas, Nev., Oct. 19, 2016. (Photo by Rick Wilking/Reuters)

Trump World isn't done running against Hillary Clinton

10/11/17 08:40AM

For much of 2017, the line from Hillary Clinton's conservative detractors was simple: she lost last year, so it's incumbent on her to retreat from public life. No one, the argument went, wanted a failed presidential candidate to be a prominent voice on the major issues of the day. It was time for her to exit the stage.

Oddly enough, the argument recently flipped. Clinton's detractors, after demanding her silence for months, have begun condemning her for not saying more about controversies such as the sexual assault allegations surrounding Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein. Suddenly, everyone wants the failed presidential candidate to be a prominent voice on a major issue of the day.

So, Clinton issued a statement yesterday expressing her disgust with Weinstein, prompting Republicans to complain that she didn't speak out quickly enough.

White House counselor Kellyanne Conway took to Twitter on Tuesday afternoon to blast Hillary Clinton over her slow pace to condemn Hollywood mogul Harvey Weinstein's alleged sexual abuses.

"It took Hillary abt 5 minutes to blame NRA for madman's rampage, but 5 days to sorta-kinda blame Harvey Weinstein 4 his sexually assaults," Conway wrote on Twitter.

It was one of several Clinton-centric tweets the White House adviser published yesterday afternoon.

I suppose the obvious response to this is to focus on Conway's audacious hypocrisy, working for Donald Trump -- a man who was repeatedly accused of sexual assault -- while criticizing Clinton for not issuing a statement condemning Weinstein at a speed Conway considers acceptable.

But what I found even more bizarre is the fact that Conway is focused on Clinton at all. The election, after all, was 11 months ago, and Clinton isn't running again. Why would White House officials care whether (and when) a former secretary of state issued a statement criticizing a Hollywood producer? Why not look past the candidate they defeated nearly a year ago?

The answer, of course, is that Hillary Clinton has apparently taken up permanent residence in Trump World's head.

read more

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump takes questions, alongside New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, left, during a campaign press event in Palm Beach, Fla., on March 01, 2016. (Photo by Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post/Getty)

Two months later, Trump's inaction on opioids is 'not good'

10/11/17 08:00AM

It started on Aug. 10. That was the day Donald Trump, speaking from one of his golf resorts, used the words many in the public-health community wanted to hear.

"The opioid crisis is an emergency, and I'm saying officially, right now, it is an emergency," the president said from Bedminster. "It's a national emergency. We're going to spend a lot of time, a lot of effort and a lot of money on the opioid crisis."

As regular readers know, Trump's use of the word "officially" stood out because of its procedural significance: when a president makes an official emergency declaration, a series of steps are supposed to kick into action. NBC News reported at the time, "Experts said that the national emergency declaration would allow the executive branch to direct funds towards expanding treatment facilities and supplying police officers with the anti-overdose remedy naloxone."

Yesterday, meanwhile, was Oct. 10 -- exactly two months later -- and the official written declaration still hasn't happened. New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R), the man the president appointed to lead a White House opioid commission, conceded yesterday that Trump's inaction is "not good."

Christie said Tuesday that the commission's recommendations are "lessened" without the declaration, but he says it's too soon to say whether not declaring one has made things worse.

"I think the problem is too big to say that if he had declared an emergency two months ago that it would make a significant difference in two months," Christie said. "But I would also say you can't get those two months back. And so it's not good that it hasn't been done yet."

The White House has been less than forthcoming in its explanation for why Trump verbally declared a national emergency two months ago, but has done nothing since. Yesterday's Associated Press report added that officials have described the declaration usually reserved for natural disasters as an "involved process."

In other words, there are some procedural complexities to this, which the administration still has to work through. And while that's entirely plausible, it raises the related question of what in the world Trump was talking about in early August.

read more

Tuesday's Mini-Report, 10.10.17

10/10/17 05:30PM

Today's edition of quick hits:

* California wildfires: "Fierce wildfires whipping up nightmare conditions in Northern California have killed at least 15 people, destroyed more than 1,500 structures and turned wineries into charred wastelands."

* Puerto Rico Gov. Ricardo Rossello today raised the death toll on the island to 43.

* A gut-wrenching day in the entertainment industry: "A wave of Hollywood actresses, including Gwyneth Paltrow and Angelina Jolie, have come forward to accuse Harvey Weinstein of sexual misconduct -- and three other women have alleged that the film executive forced himself on them."

* The White House helps make this possible: "Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu approved building plans for 3,736 new units in Jewish settlements in the occupied West Bank on Tuesday, in what activists say is part of a new wave of construction spurred by the Trump administration's more accommodating stance."

* Korean peninsula: "North Korean hackers stole a vast cache of data, including classified wartime contingency plans jointly drawn by the United States and South Korea, when they breached the computer network of the South Korean military last year, a South Korean lawmaker said Tuesday."

* What a fiasco: "A member of President Donald Trump's voter fraud probe expressed deep frustration Tuesday over the way the commission has been run so far and doubted that the panel would ever meet again."

read more

Image: U.S. President Trump displays executive order on "energy independence" during event at EPA headquarters in Washington

Trump's EPA takes aim at the Clean Power Plan

10/10/17 04:45PM

Donald Trump's hostility towards the Obama-era Clean Power Plan, in a twisted way, makes perfect sense. The Republican president believes climate change is a conspiracy cooked up by the Chinese; he reflexively opposes any policy his predecessor supports; and Trump has no real interest in helping the United States compete internationally in the area of clean energy.

And so, in March, the president issued an executive order instructing the Environmental Protection Agency to "review" the policy that intends to reduce carbon pollution from U.S. power plants. Today, as the Washington Post reports,  the far-right officials who lead Trump's EPA took the next step.

EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt issued a proposed rule Tuesday that would repeal sweeping regulation aimed at curbing greenhouse gas emissions from existing U.S. power plants.

The move, aimed at bolstering the nation's struggling coal industry, will trigger an immediate court fight and could result in months, if not years of litigation.

And it's that second part of the excerpt that stands out. The Trump administration took a deliberate step backwards today, but the policy implications aren't cut and dry. It's not as if power plants were working under one framework yesterday, which will be entirely different from the one that'll be in place tomorrow.

In fact, the Supreme Court has already blocked implementation of the Obama-era policy. The Trump administration's new rule is really just a vague proposal to go in a more regressive direction, but we have no idea what the details of the new policy look like, or when we'll even see them. A New York Times report added that Trump's EPA intends to consider a new rule "at some point."

All the while, the administration will try to fend off a series of lawsuits from environmental advocates, who may very well have some success in preserving Obama-era safeguards.

read more

Image: White House Senior Advisor Bannon attends a roundtable discussion held by U.S. President Trump with auto industry leaders at the American Center for Mobility in Ypsilanti Township

Steve Bannon's 'war' plans for 2018 come into focus

10/10/17 12:52PM

The recent Republican Senate primary in Alabama was about far more than a single seat. In a variety of ways, the race between Luther Strange and Roy Moore was a proxy fight, pitting the conservative Republican establishment against even its even-more-conservative insurgent base.

When Moore cruised to a rather easy victory, it jolted GOP politics nationwide. The Washington Examiner reported a few days after the primary that senior Republican strategists have begged red-state incumbents -- including Sens. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), Deb Fischer (R-Neb.), and Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) -- to "prepare early for a primary."

With Roy Moore winning despite being outspent and despite the opposition of the Republican establishment, the Examiner's piece added that the activists and donors who fund conservative challengers now believe "their investments might pay off."

As Bloomberg Politics reported the other day, Donald Trump's former chief strategist is ready to lead the charge.

Steve Bannon plans to back primary challengers to almost every Republican senator who runs for re-election next year in an effort to depose Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and streamline Senate voting procedures, three people familiar with his plans said. [...]

Bannon plans to support as many as 15 Republican Senate candidates in 2018, including several challengers to incumbents, the people said. He'll support only candidates who agree to two conditions: They will vote against McConnell as majority leader, and they will vote to end senators' ability to block legislation by filibustering.

"We're going to go after them. There's a coalition coming together that's going to challenge every Republican incumbent except for Ted Cruz," Bannon told Fox News last night night. "We are declaring war on the Republican establishment that does not back the agenda that Donald Trump ran on. We're going after these guys tooth and nail."

read more

Tuesday's Campaign Round-Up, 10.10.17

10/10/17 12:00PM

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

* With polls showing a potentially competitive Senate race in Alabama, former U.S. Attorney Doug Jones (D) has raised a decent amount of money, and his campaign yesterday launched its first television ad of the cycle. "I'm running for the U.S. Senate because our leaders have lost sight of what it means to serve," Jones says in the spot. "Continuing to divide us won't make a positive difference in people's lives."

* After less than a year at his post, Missouri Attorney General Josh Hawley (R) is kicking off a U.S. Senate campaign against incumbent Sen. Claire McCaskill (D) today. I'll have more on this story a little later.

* After Donald Trump endorsed Ed Gillespie's gubernatorial candidacy via twitter, the Virginia Republican didn't exactly sound excited about receiving support from the unpopular president. "I wasn't aware the president was going to tweet," Gillespie told reporters, "but I'm obviously not surprised that the Republican president is supportive of the Republican nominee."

* On a related note, Gillespie tweeted yesterday, "Always great being with the hardworking ladies of the James River Republican Women!" The tweet included a photograph of the GOP candidate standing alongside a group of men.

* Apparently Blackwater founder Erik Prince isn't the only Republican eyeing a possible primary challenge to Sen. John Barrasso in Wyoming next year. Foster Friess, a prominent GOP donor, told the Washington Post, "I sense a responsibility to prayerfully explore the possibility."

* In the latest national poll from the Associated Press, Trump's approval rating has dropped to just 32%. The same survey found the president with 67% support among Republican voters, which is down from 80% in March.

read more

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump shakes hands with supporters during a campaign rally at the USS Wisconsin battleship in Norfolk, Va., Oct. 31, 2015. (Photo by Joshua Roberts/Reuters)

In defense of dissent 'in a time of war'

10/10/17 11:29AM

Donald Trump and Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) have been trading criticisms for months, but the intensity of their dispute escalated quite a bit over the last few days. After the president said the Tennessee Republican "didn't have the guts" to run for re-election, Corker lowered the boom.

"It's a shame the White House has become an adult day care center," the senator wrote. "Someone obviously missed their shift this morning." In a New York Times interview, Corker went quite a bit further, explaining his "concerns" about Trump's stability in more detail.

Not surprisingly, Trump's boosters are not pleased. Kellyanne Conway called the senator's criticisms "incredibly irresponsible," adding in reference to Corker's rebukes, "World leaders see that."

It's that last part of Conway's reaction that came to mind while reading about Breitbart's Steve Bannon, Trump's former chief strategist, calling on the GOP senator to resign.

"Sen. Corker is an absolute disgrace," Bannon, who left the White House in August, told Fox News' Sean Hannity. "If Bob Corker has any honor, any decency, he should resign immediately. He should not let those words stand."

Bannon said Corker's comments were "totally unacceptable in a time of war."

"We have troops in Afghanistan, in the northwest Pacific and Korea, we have a major problem that could be like World War I, in the South China Sea, in the Persian Gulf, we have American lives at risk every day."

The point of pushback like this isn't subtle: in "a time of war," harsh criticisms of the president should be seen as potentially dangerous.

And if this seems a little familiar, it's because we confronted a similar tack in the recent past.

read more

Image: FILE PHOTO: The Pill Turns 50: A Look Back At Contraception

Trump administration questions birth control's health benefits

10/10/17 10:43AM

The Trump administration rolled back the clock last week on contraception access, declaring that any health provider can refuse to cover birth control if they have "sincerely held" religious or moral objections. But what went largely overlooked is  how officials made the case in support of their new policy.

As we discussed after the policy's unveiling, the practical effects of the change are obvious: some American women who receive contraception at no cost will, as a result of the Trump administration's new policy, have to pay higher out-of-pocket costs for birth control -- because their employer says so.

It was largely assumed that Donald Trump and his team would make the argument about principle: the White House would say this change is about protecting "religious liberty" and the moral choices of conservative employers. But as it turns out, they also went after birth control on the merits.

Indeed, as Bloomberg Politics reported the other day, administration officials actually questioned "the links between contraception and preventing unplanned pregnancies."

In the rule released Friday, officials attacked a 2011 report that recommended mandatory birth-control coverage to help women avoid unintended pregnancies. That report, requested by the Department of Health and Human Services, was done by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine -- then the Institute of Medicine -- an expert group that serves as the nation's scientific adviser.

"The rates of, and reasons for, unintended pregnancy are notoriously difficult to measure," according to the Trump administration's interim final rule. "In particular, association and causality can be hard to disentangle."

The Trump administration's document fleshing out its new rule went on to say that covering birth control as a core benefit available to American women could "affect risky sexual behavior in a negative way."

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