All in with Chris Hayes, Transcript 1/6/2017

: Neera Tanden, Matthew Miller, Jason Candor, Wade Henderson, Randi Weingarten



REID: Ordered by Putin.

TRUMP: No puppet, no puppet.

REID: America`s intelligence chiefs meet face to face with Donald Trump
and tell him “Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign” in the 2016
election and had a “Clear preference for President-elect Trump.”

TRUMP: I love WikiLeaks.

REID: Tonight, the jaw-dropping and now public intelligence report
detailing Russia`s efforts to elect Donald Trump, and why Trump still
refuses to single out Russia for blame.

Plus, today`s harrowing scene in Florida. We`ll have the latest on the
mass shooting at the Fort Lauderdale Airport. Then –

TRUMP: Who is going to pay for that wall?

REID: Or maybe the American taxpayer. And how democrats are keeping the
resistance going.

United States senator who will join me in this letter?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: There`s no debate.

REID: All In starts now.

REID: Good evening from New York, I`m Joy Reid in for Chris Hayes. And
there is a lot to get to tonight, including the latest on that terrible
shooting at the Fort Lauderdale Airport. But we are now two weeks from
Donald Trump taking the oath of office as president of the United States
and for months he`s been defending the president of Russia, Vladimir Putin
and is missing all the indications that Russia played a role in hacking
democratic officials while simultaneously praising WikiLeaks for releasing
damaging information about his opponent, Hillary Clinton.

Today, Trump had his long-anticipated briefing on the matter with top U.S.
Intelligence officials at Trump Tower and we now know what he was told.
Shortly after the meeting, the intelligence community released a
declassified version of its comprehensive report on Russia`s interference
in the 2016 election and the findings are nothing short of explosive. In
bold letters at the top of the report, this is the key finding, “We assess
that Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016
aimed at the U.S. Presidential Election. Russia`s goals were to undermine
public faith in the U.S. democratic process, denigrate Secretary Hillary
Clinton and harm her electability and potential presidency. We further
assess Putin and the Russian government developed a clear preference for
President-elect Trump.”

The report finds not just that Russian Military Intelligence stole data
from democratic operatives and institutions passing them on to WikiLeaks to
be released but that Russia waged a comprehensive propaganda campaign using
state-owned media and online trolls to push favorable messages about Trump
and drive negative coverage of Clinton. Now, you`d think all that would
make an impression on the President-elect himself. Today he received the
top-secret version of that very report complete with highly classified
sources and methods delivered to him in person by the director of National
Intelligence and the heads of the FBI, the CIA, and the NSA.

But in a statement released after that meeting, Trump still refused to
acknowledge or accept their conclusions about Russian`s direct role,
saying, “Russia, China, other countries, outside groups and people are
consistently trying to break through the cyber infrastructure of our
governmental institutions, businesses and organizations including the
democrat national committee.” Democrat. Instead, Trump seems more focused
on the validity of his own victory than on Russia`s attempt to disrupt
American democracy claiming, “There was absolutely no effect on the outcome
of the election, including the fact that there was no tampering whatsoever
with voting machines.”

The intelligence community never claimed that Russia`s interference had an
impact on the election results. In fact, the report states right off the
top that that was never their mission. “We did not make an assessment of
the impact that Russian activities had on the outcome of the 2016 election.
The U.S. Intelligence Community is charged with monitoring and assessing
the intentions, capabilities and actions of foreign actors, it does not
analyze U.S. Political processes or U.S. Public opinion.” So regardless of
whether Russia succeeded at influencing the election results the report
states unequivocally that they – unequivocally that they sure tried. I`m
joined by Senator Jeff Merkley, democrat from Oregon. And Senator Merkley,
when you read this report and were briefed on this report, what was your

how clear it is, this massive effort of Russian hacking, of course, hacking
the DNC and officials like John Podesta associated with it. Also an
extensive, extensive false news operation and then amplifying that false
news with a team of trolls and bloggers operating out of Petersburg. And
so it lays it out and it`s available for everyone in America to read and
quite frankly when you see they worked so hard to amplify the themes of the
Trump campaign and to denigrate Secretary Clinton in case after case after
case attacking her health and her integrity, these false news stories, I
want to emphasize that, these false news stories coming out of Russian,
being amplified by them trying to pull down her campaign.

REID: Yes. And there`s even a part in the report where they – where they
state when it appeared to Moscow Secretary Clinton was likely to win, they
shifted their efforts toward undermining her expected presidency, meaning
that they meant the damage to Clinton to radiate into her potential
presidency, meaning probably your colleagues on the other side of the aisle
would use this as far to keep investigating her.

MERKLEY: Yes. They sure did. They had a whole campaign prepared to
delegitimize her victory and then they took that down when they somewhat
unexpectedly found out Trump had won and then they were popping campaign
corks, they were celebrating. They felt they had a significant impact in
affecting the U.S. Election.

REID: And you talk about amplifying the messages that were – the false
news, the false reports being amplified. One of the people amplifying that
stuff was Donald Trump and I`m wondering what you make of the fact without
Trump himself amplifying that false news stuff on the stage, at his
rallies, really even in a sense even inflating some of the things that were
in the WikiLeaks which, you know, were pretty snarky benign e-mails, what
do you make of the fact that this couldn`t have succeeded without help from

MERKLEY: Well, I`ll tell you. It`s really hard to get your hands around
how this worked in the sense that when Trump took on a theme, to some
degree that theme was also taken up by the Russian operation, amplifying
and that`s often how a third-party campaign works in the United States when
your – you have a wall between the campaign and the thirty party and the
third party said, we`ll see what the campaign does and it help amplify it.
I can`t – I can`t say clearly, no one can at this point, how much
influence the Russian propaganda operation had as compared to the
statements that Trump himself made but in both cases they were often
completely 100 percent off-track and wrong and that`s what`s really
disturbing here is the generation of false stories – the hacking, all
directed at influencing the outcome of the presidential election, it cast
quite a shadow over the incoming presidency.

REID: And really quickly, it could potentially cast a shadow over the
senate. The Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has shown no interest
in having a special, you know, standing committee the way they had for
Benghazi and some other things. You do have John McCain attempting to do
an investigation. Do you foresee the senate doing anything about the
information in this report?

MERKLEY: John McCain really recognizes what a serious assault this is on
the foundation of our democratic republic and I applaud him for it, we
should be hearing that from every leader in this country. This is – John
McCain called it an act of war. It is certainly a major assault on the
United States system of democracy.

REID: Indeed.

MERKLEY: And it should be thoroughly analyze, extensively analyzed by a
bipartisan committee in the public, not in the secret halls of just the
intelligence committee working – majority get trapped and never let out –
a public bipartisan commission.
You`re welcome, thank you.

REID: Well, Senator Jeff Merkley, thank – and joining me now is Neera
Tanden, President of Center for American Progress, Matthew Miller, former
spokesperson for the justice department. And I`ll start with you, I`ll ask
each of you. First of all, Neera, do you have any confidence that anything
will be done about this? Do you have confidence in the senate? You just
heard Senator Jeff Merkley say that he has confidence in John McCain. Do
you have confidence in the senate?

confidence in John McCain but John McCain`s committee is not enough. As
you can see in this report there`s really breath-taking details, one of
which is that Russia has a history of exploiting – I think the term really
is exploiting western leaders with business contacts with Russia because
Donald Trump has never released his taxes, we don`t know what his business
contacts would be. Seems like they are – that`s an – that`s an avenue of
investigation and I think that`s one of the really critical reasons we need
bipartisan, bicameral investigation into this which is independent, has a
special prosecutor or has, you know, real power in the minority and the
majority to subpoena, to ask questions, to really get to the bottom of
this. I don`t have confidence in that happening now, but I hope, you know,
truly true patriots in the congress will look at this report and actually
act in the country`s interest.

REID: Yes. Absolutely. And of course, you were working with the Hillary
Clinton campaign. Have you talked to one of your fellow members of the
campaign to get their reaction to this report?

TANDEN: Just a few and it is really breath taking. I mean, the level of
detail, the clarity. I mean, you – I hope every American reads this
report, reads it for themselves to see our intelligence community speaking
in one very clear voice about the fact that Russia intended to help elect
Donald Trump and, frankly, his reactions make it clear that he knows it. I
mean, obviously why wouldn`t you just say in your statement today that
Russia did hack, that they were out to help him. Instead, his actions are
making it seem really – like he`s guilty and understands that they helped

REID: And Matt miller, you know, to go beyond, you know, we`re focused a
lot on what Russian Intelligence did in this report but it also does talk a
lot about WikiLeaks, which is still out there, which still has the ability
to obtain documents. We don`t know all of what they have and they could
use it at any time. Are we not focusing enough on the potential damage
that WikiLeaks could do whenever they feel like it depending on what they
have or who they perceive to be their enemies in the moment, including
being essentially enforcers for Donald Trump or Vladimir Putin or both.

that`s right. I think we`re just at the beginning of asking important
questions here. We now know about the Russian government`s involvement.
We know some of WikiLeaks` involvement but the question you raise is an
appropriate one. There`s another question. You know, there are many, many
ties that were documented during the campaign between Trump advisers and
Russia and in some cases the Russian government or the forces in Ukraine
who were backed by Putin and we really need to have an independent look at
whether there were people, you know, connected to the Trump campaign or
American citizens or others who were helping this undermining of the – of
American democracy by the Russian government. That`s something that, you
know, this report didn`t get into but in the days to come, congress has to
look at it, the – I think there needs to be an independent commission that
looks at it and potentially the justice department, maybe a special

REID: And, you know, Matt Miller, in this report it also talked about this
being the new normal. That this wasn`t a discrete activity that we cannot
expect to be repeated. You still have the RRT which is the propaganda arm
for the Kremlin that`s still out there with even American, you know,
American hosts appearing on it. You still got WikiLeaks out there. Do you
– do you – are you concerned about the part of the report that said that
it was also intended to undermine what they thought would be the next
president of the United States? Meaning this was an operation that would
have continued had Hillary Clinton been elected.

MILLER: Yes. And they`re not going to – and they`re not going to stand
it down just because she lost. I mean, you have to think – if you look at
what WikiLeaks was doing today, WikiLeaks was tweeting basically the same
things that Trump was tweeting today, attacking the conclusions of this
report before it came out, attacking the people that support it. So, you
know, it looks like WikiLeaks is going to be an ongoing force backing up
the Trump administration. They talked today, said something today about
assembling reports on people – about people who will are tweeting so, you
know, there is a real concern that you will have a foreign government in
cahoots with a shadowy online organization, you know, looking to undermine
political opponents of the – of the Trump administration. And I know that
sounds conspiratorial, but we just went through an election where they did
exactly that. So it`s – there is real reason to be concerned.

REID: And same question to you, Neera, because obviously had Hillary
Clinton been elected and this operation was not successful, part of it
would have still been able to ripple into her presidency theoretically. Do
you think that republicans are taking this seriously enough because Donald
Trump is their friend now but, you know, your friends today can be your
enemies tomorrow.

TANDEN: I mean, I`m frankly more concerned – the report lays out the
Russians hacked into the republicans but chose not to release the data. I
think people should be deeply concerned. What is there? Could they
release it at any time? Does that mean Russia has information today that
could be deeply embarrassing to republicans and that`s something they can
hold over them? I mean, again, it sounds conspiratorial but the reality
is, it is laid out in this report. And what I would say to Senate Majority
Leader McConnell and Speaker Paul Ryan, you both held dozens upon dozens of
hearings on Benghazi, you have our entire intelligence apparatus of the
United States saying the Russians tried to help elect Donald Trump and that
they have the power that this could be the new normal. That they could use
this information to affect Americans and American political leaders. What
do you have to hide by not holding hearings? There`s not a single hearing
in the house. How is that possible? How is it possible that they don`t
care enough in the House of Representatives to get to the bottom of these
questions? I think Americans – republicans, democrats and independents
should be asking their leaders in the house and senate to have a bipartisan

REID: Absolutely. You`d think all Americans would agree at least on that.
We shall see how it goes moving forward. Matthew Miller, thank you for
joining us. Neera is going to stick around with us.

And up next, the President-elect`s Twitter beef over the intelligence
report and just who he`s picking a fight with now – who he`s picking a
fight with now. That story in two minutes.


REID: It may take lawmakers weeks or maybe months to fully digest the
bombshell report on Russia`s attack on the U.S. Election but Donald Trump
seems to have his own fixations. Last night, NBC news revealed details on
the report and this morning Trump tweeted that he`s, “Asking the chairs of
the house and senate committees to investigate top secret intelligence
shared with NBC prior to me seeing it.” He wants a congressional
investigation into the leak. But an aide for the senate intelligence
committee told NBC News they`ve not received a formal request for an
investigation from Trump or his team. And a spokesperson for the house
intelligence committee said it had not received an official request.

Whether or not they do, however, or rather chilling message has been sent,
including to the intelligence community. Trump may not be interested in
punishing Russia for hacking the U.S., but he`s real interested in
punishing government officials for doing things that displease him. Neera
Tanden is still with us and joining the discussion, Missouri Secretary of
State, Jason Candor, former candidate for U.S. Senate. And Jason, I`ll
start with you on this because we`ve never had a president like Donald
Trump. He`s been compared to Richard Nixon, you know, and he has some
Nixonian qualities but you`re talking about a particularly vengeful spirit.
Somebody who Omarosa who worked with him on “The Apprentice” said he wants
to see everyone who ever hurt bow down. And now you`re giving that a guy a
mince power.

And let`s look at what he`s done before he`s gotten in. He wakes up this
morning and rather than thinking about national security he`s criticizing
Celebrity Apprentice, putting down Arnold Schwarzenegger. He goes in
lobbies against the Ohio Republican Party Chairman to oust him for daring
to not be for him during the campaign, and then he did something that
doesn`t seem like it hurts him but it hurts us, pulling all the ambassadors
in a precedent-breaking move denies every single U.S. Envoy, every
ambassador, an extension past inauguration day. What do we make of this?

about his tweets, which are basically the only way he makes public
pronouncements anymore. I think we should talk about them as what they
are, they`re policy positions of the United States. And that`s really the
problem with the president who`s constantly putting his own insecurity on
display. It`s no longer the case that there`s a kind of whacky guy running
for president who tweets a bunch of stuff.

These are policy positions of the United States, never minding the fact
that it`s completely ridiculous that the United States now has a position
on how Arnold Schwarzenegger is doing on Celebrity Apprentice, but how
about the fact that the policy position of the United States in a couple
weeks when he becomes president seems to be that the intelligence community
in order to prove something that we all pretty well knew was the case, like
the Russian hack, had to divulge all sorts of evidence that they usually
would haven`t to divulge publicly, which has a real consequence because now
if you`re an adversary of the United States seeking to do harm to us
through cyber-attack, well, now you know how other people got caught
because they`ve been forced to show their math. And that`s because he`s
limiting his policy positions to 140 characters and those are now the
policy positions of our country.

REID: And Neera, not only that, I mean, this is a guy who did threaten to
lock up Hillary Clinton who`s campaign you work forward to lock up his
political opponent, something we don`t usually do in the United States.
But now he is calling for an investigation asking congress – the
republicans in congress to investigate the intelligence community for
leaking to NBC news. What kind of a precedent is that setting?

TANDEN: Let`s be crystal clear about this, what`s happening. OK. Donald
Trump does not care, has exhibited almost zero interest in who leaked to
WikiLeaks, right? He – you know, someone targeted American – you know,
his opponents in order to at least undermine democracy, now we know it`s to
help his campaign, hasn`t expressed any interest in that source of leaks.
But one leak to NBC to explain what actually happened here, that`s who he`s
going to go against. And I think I have to say it`s just frankly chilling
that someone who is going to control the FBI is going to oversee the FBI,
who`s going to oversee intelligence itself, who`s going to oversee the IRS,
has essentially a vendetta via Twitter and I hope it`s just – I hope, I
hope it just maintains itself to Twitter but I think people can have real
concerns about a president who`s so interested in exacting revenge against
people who disagree with him. I mean, it`s just ridiculous to me that he
care – it seems to me he cares a little bit more about the ratings of the
Celebrity Apprentice than Russian hacking into our election.

REID: Yes. And he`s the executive producer of The Apprentice. If it
didn`t do well, he shouldn`t be flagging the show, it`s his show. Jason,
you know, I mean, but I think that`s the serious point, right? Is that
you`re giving somebody who`s showed he`s incredibly thin-skinned, who can`t
stop talking about the election, he was tweeting again this morning re-
describing his election victory and insisting that two weeks before the
Clinton campaign knew he was going to win and they cancel (INAUDIBLE) – I
mean, he`s so obsessed with this but he`s also a vengeful person, you know
that through his entire public life. Does it concern you that somebody
that vengeful will have control of the FBI, the NSA, the CIA? I mean, you
think of the possibilities.

CANDOR: It`s frightening. I mean, if you live in the United States of
America, you have to be concerned about this. If your inferiority complex
cannot be in any way assuaged by becoming President of the United States,
then it`s pretty bad. And when you run for office, one of the things that
happens is people say this interesting compliment to you sometimes, they
say, “You know, you really seem comfortable in your own skin.” Which is
kind of a compliment reserved only for politicians. No one ever says, “You
know what I love about my accountant is he`s comfortable in his own skin.”
So the threshold is low. But the reason people care about that is because
it`s a very public position in which you have a high degree of power. And
that`s anywhere in elected office. But we`re talking about the most
powerful position that you can occupy in the entire world. And so as a
result, yes, I think it`s absolutely a huge concern that now we have, for
instance, an app that exists that – the entire point of the app is to
alert you immediately if the President-elect of the United States tweets
about a publicly held company, presumably so you can get rid of the stock
if you want to - we`re talking about American companies that the President-
elect of the United States would take a position against.

REID: Yes. Can impact their stock immediately and we`ve seen it happen
already. Neera Tanden and Jason Kander, thank you – thank you both, have
a great weekend.

And still ahead, Donald Trump`s backtrack on one of his most famous
campaign promises.

TRUMP: Who`s going to pay for the wall? Who`s going to pay for the wall?
Who`s going to pay for the wall? Who`s going to pay for that wall? You
better believe it, and they`ll do it.


REID: Five people are dead, eight more wounded after a gunman opened fire
in a baggage area at the Fort Lauderdale Airport. The suspected gunman is
in custody and tonight we`re learning more about exactly who he is and what
happened today. Joining me now with the latest from the scene is NBC`s
Kerry Sanders. Kerry, what can you tell us about this gunman and about the

KERRY SANDERS, NBC CORRESPONDENT: We don`t have an answer, Joy, as to why
the gunman did what he did. He`s been identified as 26-year-old Esteban
Santiago. We believe he travelled from Anchorage to Minneapolis and from
Minneapolis here to Fort Lauderdale where when he got down to baggage claim
in terminal two, he retrieved his luggage. We`re told he checked his
weapon in the luggage, the rules are you can, indeed, check weapons in
luggage, notifying the airline. The weapons have to be separated from the
bullets. Witnesses say he then went into the bathroom, loaded his pistol
came out and started shooting. Now, we don`t know why. We do know he has
reportedly had some mental issues that the FBI says in Alaska that he
recently walked into the office there saying that the CIA was trying to
force him to fight for ISIS, so it`s a very convoluted, disturbed
individual here based on that story. The authorities right now have him in
custody. Apparently after he fired his gun multiple times, we believe he
may have changed out the clip in his hand-held pistol, a 9-millimeter three
times, he then according to witnesses lay on the ground – and lay on the
ground as the authorities arrived. I`ve spoken to some of those who were
in the downstairs area near baggage claim in terminal two who say getting
out of here they feel lucky to be alive, it was hell. Joy?

REID: All right. NBC`s Kerry Sanders telling us that the alleged gunman
said voices in his head apparently he was hearing in that horrific
shooting. All right. President Obama has – President Obama has briefed -
- has been briefed on the shooting in Fort Lauderdale while President-elect
Trump tweeted out this afternoon, “Monitoring the terrible situation in
Florida, just spoke to Governor Scott, thoughts and prayers for all, stay
safe.” Florida Governor Rick Scott arrived on the scene a short time later
and here`s what he had to say about his conversation today, including who
he spoke with.


RICK SCOTT, FLORIDA GOVERNOR: I have reached out to President-elect Trump
and spoken with – to him and Vice President Pence multiple times to keep
them informed and they told me whatever resources that we need from the
federal government they would do everything in their power to make that

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Did you talk to president Obama?

SCOTT: I have not talked to President Obama.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Has he reached out to you?

SCOTT: No, President Obama has not reached out to me but I talked to – I
talked to Vice President Pence and President-elect – President-elect Trump
and Vice president-Elect Pence quite a few times. Just to keep them

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Did you reach out to the Obama?

SCOTT: I have not.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Did President-elect Trump contact you or did you
reach out to him?

SCOTT: I reached out to President-elect Trump and Vice President-Elect

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: But you didn`t call the president? You called the
President-elect? You didn`t call –

SCOTT: Absolutely.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Would it be appropriate to call the president for

SCOTT: I have – I have a personal relationship with Vice President Pence
and President-elect Trump and I reached out.


REID: Then, late tonight, Governor Scott`s schedule was amended and he did
speak with the current President of the United States.


SCOTT: The president called me probably now 30 minutes ago. He, of
course, you know, said his prayers are with everybody that was impacted,
said that anything we need to make sure I gave him a call, so appreciate it
when something like this happens, you know, that you have the support of
the federal government.



wall 100 percent and Mexico is going to pay for the wall.

Mexico will pay for the wall, OK? Believe me. We`ll build a wall. Don`t
worry. We will build. I promise, we`re building the wall and Mexico will
pay for the wall.


JOY REID, MSNBC ANCHOR: Donald Trump has promised since the very first day
of his campaign to build a wall of the U.S./Mexico border and that the
Mexican government would foot the bill. Yeah. Not so much.

Today, the President-elect got slightly more detailed about who will
actually pay for the wall and, surprise, it`s you. The Trump transition
team and House Republicans have a plan, reports Politico, to fund the wall
with your taxpayer dollars. You`re welcome.

In an interview today with the “New York Times” Trump explained that the
idea is to speed up the process by obtaining funding now through Congress
and getting Mexico to pay us back later. “We`re going to get reimbursed
but I don`t want to wait that long” says Trump, “But you start and then you
get reimbursed.” Trump added in a tweet, “The dishonest media does not
report that any money spent on building the Great Wall, for sake of speed,
will be paid back by Mexico later.” It will make a point (ph).

Right. They`ll spend $10 billion of American taxpayers` money to build
your – the Great Wall and then demand that a foreign country repay us for
a project they oppose and that they`ve already said they have no intention
of paying for. That should make sense. Perfect.

If you recall, Trump has already had the chance to deliver the bill when he
met face to face with Mexican President Enrique Pe¤a Nieto last August.
But he apparently didn`t have the guts to make the ask.

Not only is Trump seemingly about to break a campaign promise with his new
plan, he`s also breaking with the conservative financial ideas that
Republicans claimed to care so much about.

And joining me now is MSNBC contributor and senior for Business Insider,
Josh Barro. So Josh, do your fiscally responsible sensibilities have any
problem with just, you know, we`re going to use $10 billion of our money
now and then we`ll totally going to get paid back by Mexico who doesn`t
want to build the wall later?

it`s funny. Because he said this – and it always – it felt like stick,
like how could anybody really believe that this was going to happen?

REID: Yeah.

BARRO: The “Washington Post” actually did a polled back in September and
asked people, do you think, Trump, if elected, will get the Mexicans to pay
for the wall? And 21 percent of people said that they thought – that he
would do that.

REID: Yeah.

BARRO: So, on one hand, that`s a lot of people. On the other hand, that`s
like less than half of the people who actually voted for him. So I think a
lot of the people are voting for Trump, they realize that, you know, this
was just a thing he was saying. It was not actually going to happen.

REID: Yeah.

BARRO: So – and the other thing is, you know, he says, you know, $8
billion to $10 billion, probably actually going to cost substantially more
than that if you really want a wall along the length of the border.

REID: Right.

BARRO: Trump has said well it could maybe be a fence in some places. So,
you know, it starts adding up to real money, a billion here, a billion
there. It`s something that ends up being a non-trivial item in the federal
budget if we`re actually going to foot the bill for it.

REID: Well, you know, Donald Trump can probably get away with anything.
You know, he said he could shoot one on Fifth Avenue, right, at one point
during the campaign and he could probably get away with taking back and
your take backs is on the wall. But members of Congress can`t and you can
see in their reactions, that Politico story is fascinating. Because you
can see they know they can`t go back to their districts and say there`s no

So now you have Steve King, one of these Republicans. This is – Dave
Weigel reporting in the “Washington Post,” and he tweeted “Just talked –
Dave Weigel just talked to Steve King and says – who says if Trump can get
funding for the wall from Congress, “I`m not going to say let`s wait for
the pesos”, aside from the fact of the, you know, where do you dispense
there (ph). The Republicans in Congress feel like they have to appropriate
money for a wall.

BARRO: Well – and they`re in a tough place, right, because this is an
idea that`s popular with Republicans but it`s not an idea that`s popular
broadly with the electorate. You sort of get about 2 to 1 against the idea
of building a wall on the border with Mexico. So, I think they have to be
worried in both directions.

If they try to not appropriate the money to build the wall, then they could
be attacked in primary. But if they do go along with spending what ends up
being $20 billion or whatever on this wall, then that`s something they can
be attacked for in the general election. So I think, you know, they have
some time to figure this out.

The weird situation now is the law authorizes the President to go ahead and
build the wall.

REID: Yeah.

BARRO: He just doesn`t have the money.

REID: Right.

BARRO: He can move some money around in accounts. He can go do his photo-
op in front of a piece of wall they built with some money they find.

REID: Right.

BARRO: And then we`ll see what the state of relations is come April
between the President and Republicans in Congress. There`s a lot of stuff,
including Obamacare that I think they are going to find is much more
difficult to reach agreement on than they thought it would be. So I don`t
know whether Congress in the spring will be in a mood to give Donald Trump
the money to build this wall.

REID: Yeah. So he could build a wall, not the wall.

BARRO: Right.

REID: Maybe it`s a little tiny wall.

BARRO: Right.

REID: Like a little six-foot wall.

BARRO: Yeah.

REID: But still, the other issue, of course, is the Mexico paying for it.
That`s the other part of it. And he said I`ll get them to give it to me
later. You had former Mexican President Vicente Fox Quesada who`s become
an E-Trump troll and expert Trump troll. And he says, Trump, when will you
understand that I`m going to pay for that f-ing wall. Be clear with U.S.
tax papers. They will pay for it.

And the serious side of that is you cannot compel a foreign country to do
what you say. Now Trump is making noises about renegotiating NAFTA and
trying to make them pay that way. Isn`t there a possibility that you could
just see bilateral agreements between Canada and Mexico that cut us out? I
mean, there are ways that they could get around being bullied by the
American president to give them 10 – to give us $10 billion.

BARRO: Well, two things about that. One is, during the campaign, he
actually had a plan about how he was going to get Mexico to pay for it.
And that wasn`t a good plan.

REID: Remittances.

BARRO: Yeah. He was going to impound the billion of dollars in
remittences they get sent from U.S. to Mexico over year and say I`m going
to do the impoundment unless you give me money to build the wall. And the
idea was that Mexico would have no choice because their economy depends on
that. NAFTA is another point of leverage that he has, he wants to re-
negotiate it. He could pull out.

So I think the Mexicans aren`t going to take kindly to that kind of
brinksmanship. On the other hand, the Trump election has already been a
disaster for the Mexican economy.

REID: Yes.

BARRO: And to the extent that Trump makes good on separating the U.S. from
Mexico economically through immigration, through trade, through all sorts
of things.

REID: Yeah.

BARRO: I think that can cause a huge economic mess there. Now, that said

REID: Yeah.

BARRO: – that makes it all the more emotionally unappealing for the
people of Mexico to pony up to pay for this wall after they`re being
bullied by the U.S. President.

REID: Yeah.

BARRO: So I think, no he won`t get them to pay for it but he can do a lot
of damage.

REID: Do a lot of damage to their economy which, of course, then would
increase up northward migration. So there you go. Josh Barro, thank you
very much.

And still ahead, the planned resistance to Trump`s cabinet picks as they
head to confirmation hearings on Capitol Hill. But first, we`ll check into
hotel Trump for Thing 1 and Thing 2 next.


REID: Thing 1 tonight. When Donald Trump opened his D.C. Hotel this past
fall, he said there was a key theme from the project that he wanted to
replicate for America.


TRUMP: My theme today is five words, under budget and ahead of schedule.
That`s what we did. Under budget and ahead of schedule.

This is what I want to do for our country. And this is what we`re working
so hard to do.


REID: That`s six words. But anyway, as we`ve reported before on this
show, the D.C. Hotel was not ahead of schedule. Multiple press releases
about the renovation of the hotel – which are still available on the Trump
organization website, set the anticipated grand opening at the end of 2015,
something he was even asked about in a legal deposition related to the
hotel this past summer.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: This construction scheduled to begin in spring 2014
with an expected completion in late 2015.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: OK. Was that accurate at the time?

TRUMP: Perhaps. Yeah. We were very much ahead of schedule. We`re ahead
of – we`re actually ahead of schedule and we also went higher end than we
even thought in terms of finishes and materials.


REID: Again, they planned to open in 2015, they actually opened in 2016.
Not ahead of schedule.

What about the second part of Trump`s theme that it was under budget? We
have an important update tonight and that`s Thing 2 in 60 seconds.


REID: Donald Trump has a long history of stiffing contractors for work on
his properties, and now we have an important update on his new D.C. Hotel.
So far, three contracting companies who helped build that hotel say that
they`re short more than $5 million and they filed liens against the
property with the District of Columbia.

For instance, an executive from AES electrical says, “We had people there
well over 12 hours a day for weeks because they had a hard opening of
September 12. But around the time they open, the Trump organization and
its construction manager Lend Lease stopped paying AES which claims it`s
still owed over $2 million.”

Another company, the family owned local plumbing firm Joseph Magnolia filed
a lien for nearly $3 million. The Trump organization told the “Washington
Post” in part, “In developments of this scale and complexity, the filing of
normal liens at the conclusion of construction is not uncommon as part of
the closeout process.”

So, of the purported $212 million budget for the hotel, Trump is facing

legal action for over $5 million in allegedly unpaid bills.  I guess that`s

one way to claim that you`re under budget.






REP. CARRIE MEEK, (D) FLORIDA:  Mr. President, it is in writing and signed

by myself on behalf of many of the diverse constituents in our country,

especially those in the ninth congressional district and all American

voters who recognize that the Supreme Court not the people of the United

States decide this election.


AL GORE, VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES:  Is the objection signed by a



MEEK:  Unfortunately, Mr. President, it is not signed by one single



REP. PATSY MINK, (D) HAWAII:  Unfortunately, I have no authority over the

United States Senate and no senator has signed.


MEEK:  Mr. President, it is in writing and signed by myself and several of

my constituents in Florida.  A senator is needed but missing.


GORE:  Is the objection in writing and signed by a member of the House and

a senator?


REP. MAXINE WATERS (D), CALIFORNIA:  The objection is in writing and I

don`t care that it is not signed by a member of the Senate.




REID:  That was the scene on the floor of the House of Representatives 16

years ago as portrayed in Michael Moore`s classic documentary “Fahrenheit

9/11.”  When Vice President Al Gore had to oversee the certification of the

electoral votes in one of history`s most contested elections.  Members of

Congress stood up one by one to contest the election results and Gore, the

man on whose behalf they were protesting, had to shoot them down because

they didn`t have the co-signature of a senator.  Since then, the

certification of electoral votes has been a more dry, mundane procedural

routine.  That was until today.




REP. BARBARA LEE, (D) CALIFORNIA:  Mr. President, I object on behalf of the

millions of Americans, including members of the intelligence community –



Debate is prohibited.


REP. SHEILA JACKSON, (D) TEXAS:  Mr. President, I object to the votes from

the state of Wisconsin which were not – should not be legally certified?


BIDEN:  No debate.


JACKSON:  Is there one United States senator who will join me in this



BIDEN:  There is no debate.  There is no debate.


JACKSON:  Just one.


BIDEN:  The gentlewoman will suspend.




REID:  In the end today, Donald Trump`s Electoral College victory was

certified by the Congress.  Those protests today on the House floor as

Congress is probably the last time that we`ll get to see Congressional

Democrats symbolically oppose the election results before Trump gets sworn



But next week the real substantive opposition to Trump`s presidency begins. 

What to expect for that fight after this break.




REID:  We are just a few days away from the first confirmation hearings for

Donald Trump`s cabinet nominees, including six different hearings scheduled

on the same day next week.  It will be the first time Democrats have a

chance to show what a substantive opposition to the Trump agenda will look



Joining me now, Wade Henderson, president and CEO of The Leadership

Conference on Civil Rights and Human Rights, and Randi Weingarten,

president of the American Federation of Teachers.  Thank you for being




RIGHTS:  Thank you.


REID:  Thank you.  And Wade, I`ll going to start with you.  Let`s get right

to it.  Jeff Sessions.




REID:  . there will only going to be four witnesses, that`s going to be

very limited amount of time two days, what one question do you want to hear

asked of Jeff Sessions?


HENDERSON:  Well, it`s outrageous Joy, that Senator Sessions nomination is

going forward and his hearing is being held.  And in spite of the fact that

he has failed to provide essential information that the judiciary committee

requires up every nominee who comes before that to be evaluated.


What`s really shocking in this instance, and really not shocking, but

nonetheless embarrassing, is that the Senate has chosen to use its

friendship towards Senator Sessions to cover its responsibility of

providing advice and consent for the nominee.  In other words, collegiality

is trumping, if you will, the advice and consent responsibility of the



REID:  Yeah.


HENDERSON:  What I`d like to see Senator Sessions asked are his views about

the voting rights act, about wrongful prosecutions, yes, those that

occurred 30 years ago but, more importantly, about problems with voter I.D.

today.  About problems with efforts to move polling places in states like

Alabama, his very own state.  I`d like to see him asked about whether he

can enforce statutes over which he has a hostility long established.


So, for example, he opposed the violence against women act.  He has opposed

the passage of the Matthew Shepard, James Byrd, Hate Crime Prevention Act. 

He has opposed other statutes that he is responsible now for enforcing. 

We`d like to see questions asked about that.  We`d also like to see

questions asked about his hostility to immigrants, his support for a Muslim

ban or arguing that a Muslim ban is certainly worthy of discussion.  These

kinds of issues are frightening to the American people.


And I think the American people expect two things.  One, they expect a

procedurally fair hearing, but they also expect a substantively complete

hearing.  And neither of those will take place next week because the

senator has not provided the essential information of a senate

questionnaire that is required of every nominee before the committee.


REID:  And Randi Weingarten, I have also the same question to you about

Betsy DeVos who is – DeVos– who is being put forward as the secretary of

education.  What do you want to see her asked?



we know a lot about her record in Michigan.  And her record in Michigan is

– makes it clear that this is the most anti-public education nominee since

the position of secretary of education was established.  And we know

whether people were Trump voters or Hillary voters, they want a secretary

of education that actually strengthens and improves public education where

90 percent of the children of our country go, of schools that are the

anchor of democracy, the propeller of our economy, and, instead, what she

has done in Michigan for the last 20 years is to destabilize, defund, and

siphon off funds.


And, frankly, even for our colleagues and our friends who actually believe

that there should be some alternatives, what she has done is actually made

schooling worse in Michigan.  So we want to make sure that people see the

facts.  What has happened is that 75 percent of public schools do better

than charters, these for-profit Wild, Wild West charters in Michigan.


And in Detroit we see that 80 percent of the schools, the charter schools

in Detroit, are failing.  So at the end of the day, we don`t want to

replicate that in the United States of America and we want to make sure

that her record is clearly out there.  We need a secretary of education

who`s going to lift up public education, who`s going to help all kids

succeed, not one who has a hostility to civil rights, as my colleague Wade

has just said about Senator Sessions, or someone who has an antipathy

towards anything that is public, in terms of public education.  You can`t

be about profit.  You have to be about children.  And we have seen no

evidence that she is about children in public education.


REID:  Well, very quickly I want to ask each of you.  Do you anticipate

there being something on the order of civil disobedience try to push

Democrats to be tough on these nominees?  And if so, is there a particular

nominee that civil rights groups for you, Wade Henderson, are focused on

frequently (ph)?


HENDERSON:  Yeah, yeah.  Well, I can`t predict what the civil disobedience

will be involved but I will say this.  It is very clear that opposition to

the Sessions` nomination is building.  We have 1,200 law professors from

around the country that have expressed their opposition.  We have former

Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick in a letter to the judiciary committee

stating his opposition and basing it on his prior service as an attorney

for a defendant in a wrongful voting fraud case that Sessions brought.


REID:  Right.


HENDERSON:  That kind of effort is under way.  So, we don`t know about

civil disobedience but opposition is building –


REID:  Right.


HENDERSON:  – everyday.  And we anticipate seeing more next week.


REID:  And very quickly, Randi Weingarten, do you anticipate civil

disobedience over these nominees?


WEINGARTEN:  Look, I anticipate a lot of opposition but you notice that

Senator McConnell must be very concerned about all this because he`s having

this vote-a-rama, he`s trying to flush (ph) things and push these things



REID:  Put them all together.


WEINGARTEN:  So – exactly.  So – but there`s opposition around the

country –


REID:  Absolutely.


WEINGARTEN:  – and we`re seeing all that.


REID:  Yup.  Well, we unfortunately are out of time.  Wade Henderson and

Randi Weingarten, thank you both.  Thank you, have a great weekend.


That is All In for this evening.  I`m Joy Reid for Chris Hayes.  And he

will be back on Monday, and I`ll be back right here on MSNBC tomorrow and

Sunday at 10:00 a.m. for AM Joy.


The Rachel Maddow Show starts right now.  Good evening and happy Friday,







Copyright 2017 CQ-Roll Call, Inc.  All materials herein are protected by

United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed,

transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written

permission of CQ-Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark,

copyright or other notice from copies of the content.>