All in with Chris Hayes, Transcript 2/6/2017

Ted Lieu; April Ryan; Barry McCaffrey, Matt MacKowiak, Maria Hinojosa

Show: All in with Chris Hayes
Date: February 6, 2017
Guest: Ted Lieu; April Ryan; Barry McCaffrey, Matt MacKowiak, Maria Hinojosa 



REID: Attack mode.

TRUMP: The very, very dishonest press doesn`t want to report it.

REID: President Trump blames the press, the polls and now the judicial
branch in a last-ditch effort to save his Muslim ban.

TRUMP: They have their reasons and you understand that.

REID: Tonight, where the legal showdown stands. And inside reporting on
chaos at the White House. Then,

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Putin`s a killer.

TRUMP: A lot of killers. We`ve got a lot of killers. Why, you think our
country is so innocent?

REID: General Barry McCaffrey on Donald Trump`s defense of Vladimir Putin.

the most anti-American statement ever made by the President of the United

REID: And about those ads.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What do I tell my daughter?

REID: How celebrating American values in Super Bowl commercials had
somehow turned into an insult to the President.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You don`t look like you`re from around here.

REID: When ALL IN starts now.

Good evening from New York. I`m Joy Reid in for Chris Hayes. At this
hour, the signature effort of Donald Trump`s young Presidency, his
executive order temporarily banning refugees and citizens of seven Muslim
majority countries from traveling to the U.S. is hanging in the balance.
Just a short time ago, the Trump administration filed a brief with the
federal appeals court in an effort to get the travel ban created by that
executive order reinstated. It`s an order that a federal judge in
Washington put on hold. The court is now set to hear oral arguments
tomorrow and we`re closely monitoring developments. Meanwhile, the
President is lashing out at the quote “so-called judge” who ruled against
the ban along with the entire judicial system and he isn`t stopping there,
claiming an appearance today at MacDill Air Force base in front of a
military audience that the press simply won`t report on terrorist attacks.


TRUMP: It`s gotten to a point where it`s not even being reported and in
many cases, the very, very dishonest press doesn`t want to report it. They
have their reasons and you understand that.


REID: And we don`t know exactly what attack Trump thinks that the press
has ignored. Press Secretary Sean Spicer said today, The White house plans
to provide a list, quote, “later”. But it`s possible he`s referring to the
so-called “Bowling Green massacre” which the media did not report on
because, well, no such massacre ever happened. To be clear, in 2013, two
Iraqi refugees living in Bowling Green, Kentucky, were sentenced on federal
terrorism charges after admitting that they had previously used explosives
against U.S. soldiers in Iraq. And that they`ve attempted to send weapons
and money to Al-Qaeda in Iraq.

But they were not accused of being part of or planning any attack on U.S.
soil. There simply was no massacre in Bowling Green. Counselor to the
President, Kellyanne Conway, raised the specter of a so-called “Bowling
Green massacre” in a Thursday interview right here on MSNBC with our own
Chris Matthews. Then, when the (INAUDIBLE) ridicule poured in, she claimed
that she misspoke. But we now know that she had used the phrase before.
Last Sunday, Conway brought up, quote, “The masterminds behind the “Bowling
Green massacre” in an interview with Cosmopolitan Magazine.” And on the
same day, she incorrectly described what she called the “Bowling Green
attack” in an interview with entertainment site TMZ.


here, got radicalized, joined ISIS and then were the masterminds behind the
Bowling Green attack on our brave soldiers.


REID: Meanwhile, Spicer claimed today that the protest against Trump`s
executive order were chose organically across the country almost
immediately after the ban was announced, or not organic at all.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Do you sense that there`s an organized pushback and
people are being paid to protest?

SPICER: Oh, absolutely. I mean, protesting has become a profession now.
They have every right to do that, don`t get me wrong. But I think that we
need to call it what it is. It`s not these organic uprising that we`ve
seen through the last several decades, and you know, the Tea Party was a
very organic movement. This has become a very paid AstroTurf-type


REID: Quite a leading question there. There`s no evidence to support that
claim, of course, but a lack of evidence doesn`t seem too much matter to
the Trump administration. Vice President Mike Pence today said it would be
his honor to lead an investigation into widespread voter fraud which the
President claims kept him from winning the popular vote, but which is not
an actual thing that happened in the real world. President Trump is also
claiming that polls that showed disapproval for him or his agenda simply
aren`t true. Shortly after CNN discussed a poll finding that most
Americans oppose the travel ban, Trump tweeted “any negative polls are just
fake news, just like with CNN, ABC, NBC polls in the election. Sorry,
people want border security extreme vetting.”

And the - and the growing perception that Trump`s chief strategist Bannon -
is - Steve Bannon is the one who`s really running the show in the White
House. Well, that seems to be getting under Donald Trump`s skin. After
The New York Times reported that Trump was not fully briefed on the details
of the executive order that he signed giving Bannon, the chief strategist,
a seat on the National Security Council. And Saturday Night Live showed
Bannon in the form of the grim reaper taking the main desk while Trump sits
down at a kiddie desk in the Oval Office.

Our own Joe Scarborough suggested this morning that perhaps Bannon is the
one who`s, quote, “Calling all the shots in the White House”. And less
than an hour later, Trump tweeted, “I call my own shots. Largely based on
an accumulation of data and everyone knows it. Some fake news media in
order to marginalize lies.” Joining me now is Democratic Representative
Ted Lieu of California who serves on the House of Foreign Affairs
Committee. Congressman Lieu, thank you for being here. What do you make
of this tendency of Donald Trump to say that any information that strikes
him as negative toward him is just not real and just counting it as lies?

that question. Let me say that we have a problem here in America. Our
President lies pathologically. He has a staff lie pathologically and then
he attacks the free press, he attacks the judiciary, and this is what
starts authoritarianism. Donald Trump is a danger to republic and we need
to wake up America to understand the harms that he`s causing our country.

REID: Well, you have even gone so far as to tweet and to suggest that
Donald Trump needs a mental health evaluation. On Saturday you tweeted,
“Last 24 hours on Twitter, realDonaldTrump went on rant against - about
death and destruction fake news and evil. Should he get a mental health
exam?” Do you want to expound on that?

LIEU: Happy to. I am not a Psychiatrist or Psychologist but I do read
Donald Trump`s Twitter feed. I hope lots of people read it and they can
determine for themselves whether there are some mental issues as an
observer who is not a doctor, I think there are some issues there because,
again, our President lies pathologically, he has a disconnection from the
truth that is highly disturbing and we can`t have that person making
decisions on things like nuclear weapons and we need to wake up and really
start looking at this issue.

REID: Well, speaking of nuclear weapons, I mean, yourself and Ed Markey of
Massachusetts have actually plotted a bill that would curb Donald Trump`s
ability to launch a nuclear strike. Is this pegged to this idea that he`s
mentally unhealthy or do you have any sort of scientific evidence to back
up the idea that he`s not mentally suitable to make those decisions on a
nuclear strike?

LIEU: We actually introduced this bill last year. So we think it should
apply to any American President. But certainly the rants by Donald Trump
do make this issue somewhat more urgent. What the issue is, is right now,
one person can destroy the whole world. The President, he can launch 4,000
nuclear weapons with no checks or balances from the judiciary or the
congress. We think if (INAUDIBLE) constitution never would have allowed
that. That`s why our bill, which has now been endorsed by The New York
Times, says that the President first needs to get a declaration of war from
congress before launching a nuclear first strike.

REID: Got it. And Representative Lieu, you know, one thing that`s
fascinated me about watching this congress, is the clear discomfort of
republicans of your colleagues on the other side of the aisle, with any
criticism of Donald Trump, even when he says something that directly
contradicts of all of the past held positions of the republican party, on
Russia, particularly on Russia but really on anything. Do you - behind the
scenes, are your colleagues on the other side of the aisle voicing any
problem with this? Are they as sort of freaked out by some of the things
that he does as democrats are?

LIEU: Absolutely. And many of them are conveying that privately. But you
do have some republican members publicly now contradicting the President.
In fact, Mitch McConnell had to go public and say, no, America and Russia
are not equivalent. You have now more and more members of congress
standing up to Donald Trump because they realize he just makes stuff up,
and he lies pathologically and he really does have this disconnection from
the truth that is so very dangerous.

REID: Well, I mean, that almost makes me feel worse, right? I mean,
because the idea of checks and balances was that this co-equal branch of
government , the article one power of the congress could slow a President
down or check him if he was going beyond the rails. If members of the
Republican Party are saying that behind the scenes, then, you know, do you
see any signs that they will then go publicly and actually use their power
to check and balance this President?

LIEU: I hope they do and you are already starting to see more of this
happen after Donald Trump had that very offensive call with the Australian
Prime Minister, you saw that Senator McCain had to make a call to
Australian embassy to calm things down. You saw republican Senator Corker
make a similar call. So now you have republican members of congress trying
to cover for the actions of our American President. That is highly
disturbing and, again, we need to really look at this issue, and have
people ask some serious questions.

REID: Absolutely. Well, Representative Ted Lieu, thank you so much for
being with me tonight. Appreciate it.

LIEU: Thank you.

REID: Thank you. And joining me now, April Ryan, White House
correspondent at American Urban Radio Network and author of “At Mama`s
Knee: Mothers and Race in Black and White”. And MSNBC political analyst
Michael Steele, former chair at the Republican National Committee. Thank
you both for being here. And April, I`ve got to start with you because
there was this extraordinary New York Times story this weekend that told a
tale of what`s happening in the White House. It was pretty extraordinary.
Everything from Donald Trump going through and flipping through books about
window coverings with an apparent sense of glee about that, aides not able
to find the light switches and conferring in the dark because they can`t
figure out how to operate them. This idea that Chris Christie the Governor
of New Jersey had prepared an entire sort of briefing book. And he`s the
only one with any governmental (INAUDIBLE) experience. And help them get
set up and that was thrown in the garbage. But probably the most
disturbing detail, this idea that Donald Trump find an executive order to
give Steve Bannon extraordinary powers, put him on the NSC without really
understanding what he was signing. What is the scuttlebutt about that
report on capitol hill and I`m particularly interested on what republicans
think of it.

this. It`s even deeper than what you just chronicled. There`s a lot of
stuff going - there`s high drama at the White house and you can see there`s
a manic pace going on. And when you have a manic pace, it`s hard to really
pull things together and take time to take a moment to sit and read through
legislation or read through your executive orders. I mean, you hear some
people on capitol hill talking about, oh, well, you know, many people don`t
really read the bills. Well, this is showing that this is proof to a
certain extent, this new President is not reading his documentation and
they like to use the example of former President Barack Obama so much. He
used to leave that Oval Office and I`ve seen him walking from the Oval
Office down the colony to the executive mansion where he would go home,
have dinner with his kids and then later on open up his paperwork and still
read through things. This President likes to tweet. This President likes
to watch the news. He may be watching us now. But it`s imperative that he
takes time to read. And people on capitol hill, particularly republicans,
they are cringing at this because there are a lot of life or death issues
that have going on by the stroke of the pen right now with these - the
latest executive orders and it`s very important that he reads.

REID: And you know - and Michael Steele, I remember when you were chairman
of the Republican National Committee at the start of the Obama
administration and the RNC was quite critical of Barack Obama and the pace
and the speed with which he wanted to make big policy and I`m particularly
thinking of health care.


REID: How do you justify the pace and sort of velocity with which this
White house has seemed to throw policy out there without really seeming to
think it through or without the President fully knowing what it is?

STEELE: I don`t try to justify it at all. I think my concerns/criticisms
would be apropos here as well. You know, the idea that you rush through a
health care bill and law that the speaker of the house acknowledges, we
haven`t read but must pass it, is no less onerous than or no more onerous
than what we see happening here where you`re rushing through executive
orders in this instance without fully appreciating what the ramifications
of those orders are. To the point that the President himself gets caught
flat-footed and is angered by the fact that he signed something reportedly
that he was unaware of the full extent of it. And I think what you`re
seeing now, Joy, is the right - the White House under the leadership of the
chief of staff with the backing of the President taking greater control and
reins over this operation to put in place the appropriate protocols. The
one thing that the hill really wants to see and April knows this well is
structure. They love structure. And without structure, a lot of bad
things tend to happen and I think that`s what - why you see the lawsuits,
the protests and a lot of other things that are beginning to concern people
on the hill because of the lack of structure. So we`ll see whether or not
the chief of staff Reince Priebus has given the full and total complete
authority he needs as chief of staff. Think about it, Joy, and April. You
know this as well. There only - there`s only one other person in the White
House who can tell the President no outside of the first lady and that
should be the chief of staff. That`s the weight of that office and the
responsibility of that office and it will be interesting to see whether or
not the former chairman now chief of staff can exercise that.

REID: Is it structure or is it the contents of the policy? I don`t think
that people are out marching the streets because of lack of structure.
They`re marching in the streets because they oppose the idea of banning
people from the country just because of their religion.

STEELE: Well, that goes to the structure because if you don`t have the
structure in place, then you lay down the policy in a way that you have
tried to avoid as much of that as possible. Look, the progressives, the
liberals are going to be against what the President is doing regardless.
So you know that. That`s baked in. But you don`t have to create more
fodder for them. You don`t have to give them more ammunition, particularly
when you layer on top of that judicial responses as a result of court
decisions. So I think a little bit of laying that out, thinking it
through, anticipating some of the pushback that you can get, getting more
members of congress on board ahead of time, certainly getting all the
cabinet officials involved will help stem some of that.

REID: OK. April, really quick two-part question for you. You do those in
the briefings, so I can do it to you. Part one, do you see any evidence
whatsoever that there is some sort of structure forming in the White House
with Reince Priebus at the head and not Steve Bannon? And, number two,
this extraordinary claim by Trump today that the media just doesn`t cover
terrorist attacks. Do you see any evidence that the media that goes whole
hard on any attack that even sounds like it might be by a Muslim is not
being covered maybe that was more of a statement than a question but go
ahead, April Ryan.

RYAN: All right Joy Reid, you`re playing April Ryan of the Briefing Room.
OK. So one, they might try to form structure but it is upheaval. People
are vying and jockeying for top spots and jockeying for attention. It`s
major upheaval. I don`t know when it`s going to settle down. It seems
like Steve Bannon is really the one, not Reince Priebus, who has the
President`s ear more so. When it comes to the press and covering things,
we are covering things. This President, you know, in this administration
wants to get down on us. So, I mean, they are saying we`re not but we are.
But they are actually doing things like leaking things to TMZ as well.

REID: Yes. And all the praise for Putin. Which is also interesting too.

RYAN: Yes.

REID: April Ryan and Michael Steele, thanks to you both for being with me.
Appreciate it.

STEELE: All right.

RYAN: Thank you both.

REID: And still to come, an incredible defense of an autocrat`s worst act
from the President of the United States. Retired General Barry McCaffrey
on Donald Trump`s support for Vladimir Putin is next. And the resistance
takes to the capitol. These are live pictures of the senate floor where
democrats are pulling an all-nighter to try and stop President Donald
Trump`s pick for Education Secretary. We`ll show you that fight and how
it`s taking shape ahead.


REID: Donald Trump`s strange and repeated defense of Russian President
Vladimir Putin has hit a new low. In an interview with Bill O`Reilly Trump
talked about possible cooperation with Russia, but then he quickly got into

TRUMP: And if Russia helps us in the fight against ISIS, which is a major
fight and Islamic terrorism all over the world.


TRUMP: Major fight. That`s a good thing. Will I get along with him? I
have no idea.

O`REILLY: He`s a killer. Putin`s a killer.

TRUMP: There`s a lot of killers. We`ve got a lot of killers. What, you
think our country`s so innocent? Do you think our country`s so innocent?

O`REILLY: I don`t know of any government leaders that are killers.

TRUMP: No. Take a look at what we`ve done, too. We`ve made a lot of
mistakes. I`ve been against the war in Iraq from the beginning.

O`REILLY: Yes. Mistakes are different.

TRUMP: A lot of mistakes. OK. But a lot of people were killed. So a lot
of killers around, believe me.

REID: Now just a reminder. As to why Donald Trump fall so (INAUDIBLE) is
so shocking. The list of Putin critics who have ended up dead include a
former KGB agent who was poisoned with polonium. And a former deputy Prime
Minister who was shot dead in the street with insight with the Kremlin.
And joining me now MSNBC military analyst General Barry McCaffrey. Well
General McCaffrey, your thought son this idea. And when you really even
listen to it again, it was shocking hearing at the first time. But the
idea that there`s no difference, essentially, morally between Vladimir
Putin who kills journalists, I`ve read 36 journalist murdered in Russia
since 1992. And it sounds like he`s saying the United States military in

MCCAFFREY: Yes. I was incredulous when I heard the statement, Joy. I
mean, here is right on the verge of going down to Centcom headquarters in
Florida. The joint command along with special operations command which is
done the preponderance of the fighting. 60,000 sum of U.S. troops killed
and wounded protecting America since 9/11. Are those are people he`s
talking about? In many ways, it`s the most shameful thing I`ve ever heard
a President say. Putin`s running a criminal oligarchy. He invaded and
siege Crimea, Easter Ukraine, his aircraft are buzzing U.S. Navy warships
at sea in international waters. This guy is a thug. And so I was very
proud - thank God, Senator Mitch McConnell and Congressman Ryan are going
to have huge responsibilities to give us some balance in government in the
coming years.

REID: I mean, earlier today, you called it the most un-American thing an
American President has said. Do you stick with that statement?

MCCAFFREY: Yes. I mean, you know, the other one, the whole notion on
torture. I mean, did you mean, didn`t publicly talk of torture. Putin
doesn`t talk up torture. What are we saying? We have American values,
certainly in the armed forces we do. We don`t always get it right. You
know, we`ve made some serious errors in the past and every facet of our
government. But for god`s sakes, this is still a citadel of principle and
goodness, not one that looks like thugocracy in the rump Russian Republic.

REID: You know - you know I recalled that during President Obama`s ten
year, republicans would repeatedly say that he was apologizing for America.
That he didn`t truly love country. That he was going around the world
apologizing. Has it surprised you there hasn`t been more condemnation of
these kinds of statements coming out of republicans?

MCCAFFREY: Well, I think, you know, a lot of people are just nonplus, I
don`t know what to make of it. But I don`t either - you know, he was
elected with millions of supporters. So I personally think he is - kind of
statements are - he`s betraying the people that voted for him. But in the
long run, this is going to be a very tough situation if we can`t sort this
out. You know, Admiral Mike Mullen had a great op-ed today in the New York
Times talking about the National Security Council. And it wasn`t only
adding this political operative of Mr. Bannon to the - as a principal, it
was excluding a four the chairman of the JCS and reign four star general
have been - it`s astonishing what`s going on over there. So they need to
take a pause and think through of how to responsibly govern in a democratic
society and they are not doing it right now.

REID: And what do you make of - I mean, we, the President Obama before he
left the office pushed more U.S. tanks and troops into Poland, right? In
an attempt to protect a Nato ally against the aggressiveness of Russia.
What might those troops be thinking right now with the President seemingly
more aligned in some senses with the President than our troops in many

MCCAFFREY: You know, Putin actually is a major threat to the freedom of
new Nato members in Eastern Europe. Particularly Poland. They`re
frightened of this guy. And they`re with good reason. So it`s not just
United States. It`s also the Nato alliance is trying to pull itself
together to provide deterrence against having the eastern Ukraine invasion
happen in other places. So again, you know, the armed forces, 2.3 million
men and women in uniform, active guard reserve, are prepared to deter
mischief from Putin in western Europe. Where`s our President? By the way,
thankfully, we have Secretary Jim Mattis as Secretary of Defense and I
think this former congressman Mike Pompeo is going to be a stable,
knowledgeable person, also. But this is really unsettling. America is its
alliances and the Nato alliance is central to our security. The question
is, where`s Mr. Trump going with all this?

REID: Yes. Indeed. Well thank you so much for all your time. General
Barry McCaffrey, knows of what he speaks. Thank you sir.

MCCAFFREY: Good to be with you, Joy.

REID: Thank you.

And still ahead. The President of the United States attacks a co-equal
branch of government. Attacking the judge who blocked his travel ban
saying if something happens, blame him. That happened. So how are
republicans defending this behavior? That discussion is coming up.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Do I tell her that despite her education, her drive,
her skills, her intelligence, she will automatically be valued as less than
every man she ever meets? Or maybe I`ll be able to tell her something

REID: That ad from Audi promoting gender pay equity was one of the many
Super Bowl ads packing an unmistakable political message. Some seemingly
geared in direct opposition to the new President. We`ll discuss the
resistance from the streets to the airwaves, coming up.


REID: A federal appeals court will hear oral arguments tomorrow on
President Donald Trump`s travel ban. The court will decide whether or not
the government can resume enforcement of that ban, which was temporarily
halted Friday by federal Judge James Robart.

Meanwhile, Donald Trump is under fire from across the political spectrum
for his attack on Judge Robart, a George W. Bush appointee, questioning the
judge`s legitimacy in a tweet Saturday that read, “the opinion of this so-
called judge, which essentially takes law enforcement away from our
country, is ridiculous and will be overturned.”

Trump added on Sunday, “just cannot believe a judge would put our country
in such peril. If something happens blame him and court system.”

Joining me now is Republican strategist Matt MacKowiak and MSNBC
contributor Charlie Sykes who is the editor of Right Wisconsin.

Thank you both for being here.

And Matt, former member of Congress I`m going to go to you first. How can
- what do you make of this attack on Judge Robart by Donald Trump? Former
congressman, sorry.

MATT MACKOWIAK, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST: Yeah, absolutely. I don`t think
it`s appropriate. I don`t know what “so-called” judge means. He`s either
a judge or he`s not. But he certainly could have called him an activist
judge, perhaps. We`ll see what the ninth circuit does.

I half expect the left-wing 9th circuit, you know, in a three judge panel
to rule against Trump 4-0.

Ultimately I think a court higher than the 9th circuit is going to decide
this, and that`s what`s going to be so interesting about Supreme Court
nominee Judge Neil Gorsuch is when does he get in on the court and does the
Supreme Court have a 4-4 split when this comes to them, or are they able to
wait until he gets on the court. I think that`s the thing to watch.

REID: And sorry for turning you into a member of congress. I know that`s
not a popular thing to be right now.

MACKOWIAK: That was an insult, yeah.

REID: You`re a Republican strategist, which I think is a bit more popular
than being any kind of member of congress, current or former..

Charlie Sykes, never been a member of congress so you`re clear on that

I`ve heard some of the rumbling today, just sort of among the legal beagles
that they are hoping
there is not any kind of a 4-4 split if this goes to the Supreme Court,
that what`s needed here definitiveness, because the idea that you can, a,
challenge a legitimacy of a judge who is sitting on the bench, whatever
party, you know, whatever party the president was that nominated him, is
problematic. But also this idea that the court has to get the same
briefings as the president on intelligence before they can rule on the
lawfulness of his orders.

A lot of people in the legal world are saying that`s disturbing. We need a
definitive ruling here.

CHARLIE SYKES, MSNBC CONTRIBUTOR: Yeah, you need to separate out the
merits of this case from what the president did yesterday. The best-case
scenario here was this was just one of his Twitter cheap shots rather than
a well-thought out attack on the legitimacy of the independent judiciary.

Because if it`s the latter, we`re starting to see the pattern of a
president who wants to delegitimatize every institution that might be a
check or a challenge to him. And then look that`s disturbing.

Donald Trump clearly does not have a feel for what an independent judiciary
means. And I think that that is something to keep in mind. This is not
the first time he`s attacked a judge. It`s not clear that he fully
understands what the constitutional checks and balances and divisions of
power are in this country. And I`m guessing that those two words that so-
called that that resonated awfully widely within the federal judiciary.

REID: And, you know, that is an important point. I do remember that Khizr
Khan did offer to give him a copy of his constitution. Maybe he should
take it.

Matt, you know, why do you suppose more Republicans are not condemning this
attack on the judge when Trump attacked Judge Curiel who was presiding over
a case, a lawsuit against him, even Paul Ryan, who never attacks Donald
Trump came out and attacked that. Why aren`t Republicans speaking up?

MACKOWIAK: Yeah, look, I think in Washington there`s always a disincentive
for members of one party to criticize a president of the same party. I
don`t remember Democrats criticizing President Obama very much.

REID: But President Obama never attacked a federal judge or…

MACKOWIAK: That`s true. But a recent study I saw showed that he`d been
overturned more than any modern president by the courts.

So, look, the courts are going to decide this. I agree with Charlie, like
there`s a difference between what President Trump says and what he does.
We`ve got to pay attention to what he does. Those are the things that have
real impact on real people.

But again, I think the case law here, and I think the constitution is
pretty clear that the president of the United States has the jurisdiction
to decide who can enter this country as it relates to national security and
immigration. But, again, this executive order was clumsily, I think,
unveiled, didn`t handle people in transit - this issue with visa holders
and green card holders. We`ll see where it goes from here. The courts are
going to decide this ultimately, and I guess we`re going to have opening
arguments tomorrow.

REID: Well, I would love for the producers to check on that stat that you
said whether or not President Obama was overturned by many - more than any

Well, we`re going to have the producers look that up, too, because we want
to make sure that we are keeping her facts straight here.

But I want to talk to you - you said about what the president does versus
what he says. Let`s take a look at one of the things he says and get you
to comment on what you think it means he might do.

This is Donald Trump talking about Vladimir Putin on Bill O`Reilly`s show.
Take a listen.


TRUMP: Will I get along with him? I have no idea.

BILL O`REILLY, FOX NEWS: He`s a killer, though. Putin`s a killer.

TRUMP: There are a lot of killers. We`ve got a lot of killers. What, you
think our country is so innocent? Do you think our country is so innocent?

O`REILLY: I don`t know of any government leaders that are killers in

TRUMP: Well, take a look at what we`ve done, too.


REID: So Matt, General Barry McCaffrey, who is an MSNBC analyst, but also
a military veteran of some renown, called that the most unAmerican thing
he`s ever heard an American president say. Your thoughts?

MACKOWIAK: Yeah, look, it`s something I can`t possibly agree with, to
equate what Russia does as a regime versus what the history of the United
States is. It`s freed more people across the world than any other country
in the history of the world, you can`t equate them. You just can`t.

Now, look, maybe he`s trying to use Russia to try to solve this ISIS
problem in Syria, maybe he`s playing some kind of three-dimensional chess
here that isn`t visible to my eye. But, look, that was a poor statement.

You saw Republicans on Sunday criticize him, Senator Majority Leader
McConnell did that, Senator Marco Rubio of Florida and others. That`s just
a statement he needs to take back.

REID: Charlie Sykes, did you ever think you`d live to see the day when a
Republican president would take the side of Russia and essentially say we
are no better than the president who has presided over the death of some 32
journalists? Did you ever think you`d live to see this Republican Party?

SYKES: Absolutely not.

And the reality is that if Barack Obama had said anything like that,
Republicans heads would have exploded, they would have been talking about
this, they would have been outraged and it would have lasted for four

Look, General McCaffrey`s comments I think are incredibly important. We
know that Donald Trump watches a lot of television. I hope he sees that
clip, because it`s one thing for Donald Trump
to blow off what Hollywood celebrities might say about him, but for
somebody with the credentials and the weight and gravitas of General
McCaffrey to make the comments he made, this is a real problem. This is a
real problem for Donald Trump.

Plus, look, conservatives have been pushing back against this false moral
equivalency for 50 years. This is the kind of stuff the rhetoric that you
might have expected from some anti-war left winger. To come from the
president of the United States is not only morally obtuse, it is
politically self-destructive.

REID: Yeah, absolutely.

And you know what, we know that he does watch a lot of TV. So, there`s a
good chance he did see it.

Charlie Sykes and Matt MacKowiak, thank you both for being here.


REID: Thank you.

And still ahead, Senate Democrats are in the middle of a last-ditch effort
to stop Betsy DeVos` confirmation as secretary of education, holding the
floor for 24 hours. The Democratic resistance and
the resistance by way of Super Bowl ads ahead.

Plus, Thing One, Thing Two gets the SNL treatment right after this break.


REID: Thing One tonight, Senator Al Franken got into politics via a unique
path, part of which went through this very building, spending years as a
writer and cast member for Saturday Night Live before he took office.

So when there was a suggestive exchange during Rick Perry`s confirmation
hearing last month, they were all very aware it could become fodder for the
SNL writers` room.


SEN. AL FRANKEN, (D) MINNESOTA: Thank you so much for coming into my
office. Did you enjoy meeting me?

RICK PERRY, FRM. GOVERNOR OF TEXAS: I hope you`re as much fun on that dais
as you were on your couch.


PERRY: May I rephrase that, sir?

FRANKEN: Please. Please. Please. Oh, my lord.

PERRY: Well, i think we found our Saturday Night Live sound bite.



REID: Well, ultimately that exchange did not make it to the SNL stage, but
there was a
Franken moment from another hearing that did, which one? That`s Thing Two
in 60 seconds.


REID: So Rick Perry`s moment with Senator Al Franken may have been a bit
too on the nose for SNL, but clearly the writers were watching the senator
interact with the nominee for secretary
of education.

You may recall, Betsy DeVos struggled with Franken`s questions about a very
common topic of debate in the education community: should we measure growth
or proficiency.


question correctly, around proficiency, I would also correlate it to
competency and mastery.

FRANKEN: Well, that`s growth. That`s not proficiency.

DEVOS: The proficiency is if they`ve reached a like third grade level for
reading, et cetera. Is that…

FRANKEN: No, I`m talking about the debate between proficiency and growth.


REID: Senator Franken famously never did get an answer to that question.
And tomorrow we`ll find out if that matters to 50 Republican senators.

But on Saturday Night, another classic Kate McKinnon impersonation was



KATE MCKINNON, ACTRESS: Hello and thank you. Yes, yes, the man?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yeah. Hi. I don`t think we ever got a clear answer on
this. How do you value growth versus proficiency in measuring progress in

MCKINNON: OK. Well, yes, I don`t know anything about school, but I do
think there should be a school, probably Jesus school, and I do think it
should have walls, and roof and gun for potential grizzly.

MCCARTHY: Thank you. Betsy, that`s enough for now.

MCKINNON: Thank you.




SEN. BOB MENENDEZ, (D) NEW JERSEY: When asked if she would do away with
gun-free schools zones if told so by the president, Mr.s DeVos after trying
to avoid the question with a non-answer about grizzly bears attacking
schools said that she would support the president.

I do not believe that it is the role of a cabinet secretary to simply and
blindly support the president regardless of how misguided or dangerous an
idea might be.


REID: Right now on the floor of the United States Senate, Democrats are in
the midst of a 24 hour protest of Donald Trump`s nominee for Education
Secretary Betsy DeVos.

The objective is not to stop the vote from happening: the Democrats don`t
have the ability to do that, instead their aim seems to be to give
constituents more time and motivation to call, write, email, Facebook and
otherwise put pressure on their representatives to vote against DeVos.

Democrats need just one more dissenting Republican to kill her nomination.
After Republican Senators Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Susan Collins of
Maine both said last week that they would vote against DeVos rather than a
champion of public education.

The Tampa Bay Times is reporting that Florida Senators Marco Rubio and Bill
Nelson are facing an onslaught of pressure to vote against DeVos.

As it stands now, Vice President Mike Pence in his capacity as president of
the Senate, will be be forced to break what`s currently a 50/50 tie making
it the first time a vice president has had to vote on a cabinet nominee

Now, one of the things that we can take from the first couple of weeks of
Donald Trump`s presidency is that resistance is not futile. From Democrats
systematically slowing down the process of
getting cabinet nominees confirmed to congress backing down a plan to gut
the Congressional Ethics Office after a public outcry, to a lawsuit by the
attorneys general of Washington and Minnesota that temporarily stopped the
federal government from enforcing key parts of Trump`s travel ban, it`s
clear that opposition and visible loud, public pressure works.

In watching last night`s Super Bowl, the cultural resistance to Trumpism
was on full display and
we`ll talk about that, next.



UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I want to a brew a beer.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Welcome to St. Louis, son.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: A beer for my friend, please.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Thank you, but next time, this is the beer we drink.
(inaudible) Anheuser (inaudible) Busch.


REID: That not so subtle Budweiser ad that ran during the Super Bowl
highlighting the immigrant story behind the founding of Anheuser-Busch was
one of many ads carrying what sure felt like political messages. Another
ad focusing on immigration last night is from the company 84 Lumber
showing a mother and daughter on what appears to be an arduous journey to

The first cut of that ad, which depicted a massive border wall standing in
their way did not air last night. It was rejected by Fox for being too,
quote, political. Well, here is the part of the ad that did


REID: Sorry. The part that did not air is what you just saw. The ad, as
you can see, ends
with the family spotting a huge door in the wall and pushing it open. Then
it cuts to a man driving with tools and lumber in the back of his truck
with a tagline that reads, “the will to succeed is always welcome here.”

And joining me now is Ali Velshi, chief business correspondent for NBC News
and Maria Hinojosa, anchor and executive producer of NPR`s Latino USA.

Thank you both for being here.

Maria, I`ve got to ask you, because last night, as you started to see the
anger sort of building up on Twitter again particularly ad and the
Budweiser ad, when did these sort of basic American ideas of immigration
and the plucky will to succeed become a political statement against the
American president?

MARIA HINOJOSA, NPR: Yeah, well, you know, when did we think this was
going to
happen because immigration is the story of America unless you were brought
here as a slave. But I think that for me it felt very manipulative. I
think that`s kind of what I`m coming away from. And especially if you put
those two ads back to back.

But particularly the ad about the journey of the young woman and her child.
So I watched it during the Super - well, no, I didn`t – I taped it and
watched but I happened to stop on that ad. I watched it, this part that
you`re seeing here. And I was really taken by the love between the
daughter and the mother. I found it beautiful, and I found the
cinematography beautiful. And I was like, oh my god, there`s a humanizing
here. What`s going to happen? And of course then it cut off. And I
didn`t see the rest of it until this afternoon when I knew I was going to
be coming here.

REID: Right.

HINOJOSA: And I was really upset and angry. I felt so manipulated by
this, because it`s the normalization of a wall. So the wall exists. It`s
already built. It`s normalized. And then to normalize something that is
completely not true. The notion that there is a door, that there will ever
be a door
in that wall, that kind of hope. And I feel like it`s preying on people`s
emotions, that it`s like, oh, you`ll feel for that mother and that child.

REID: Right.

HINOJOSA: But in the end, door didn`t open for you and so sorry. Open for
them because I guess god made it open.

ALI VELSHI, NBC NEWS: So ironically, the CEO – I`ve been in this business
for 24 years. I`ve been covering business. I`ve never heard of 84 Lumber
in my life. It`s probably now the best known lumber company in the world.

REID: Sure.

VELSHI: The CEO of that company was a Trump supporter. The story was
about the door. So, Maria`s reaction is actually correct.

HINOJOSA: That`s fascinating.

VELSHI: All of those who were mad at it, the Trump supporters who didn`t
like the Anheuser-Busch, there was boycott Busch hashtag and all of those
who didn`t like the 84 Lumber ad, the 84 Lumber Ad was somebody who wanted
to focus on Donald Trump saying, there`s going to be a big, beautiful, huge
door in that wall.

HINOJOSA: Oh, my goodness.

VELSHI: That`s what that is about. That is a Trump supporter saying we
need the wall, but we need the door.

REID: That`s the first time that I`ve heard that, honestly, because all of
the talk we`ve heard about this ad has been that it was…

VELSHI: Overtly political and aimed at Trump.

REID: Right, that it was a thumb in the eye of Donald Trump, but this is
the first time I`m hearing the other side of the story.

VELSHI: So, remember that Coca-Cola ad last night is an old ad, it`s from
2014. And when it ran in 2014, virtually nobody thought it was political,
some people did. But virtually nobody did.

There were some people in 2014 angered by the idea of an American patriotic
song being sung by different voices and different languages, but in my
opinion those are the people who go home and kick their puppies.

So that wasn`t political on that level. Coke probably said we don`t want
to get crazy political this time, so we`re going to run an old ad. But
even that has overtones of…

HINOJOSA: It just – again, it begins to feel so manipulative. The ad
with Anheuser-Busch of
the immigrant who is coming from Germany and it`s just like he experiences
one moment where somebody says, we don`t like your kind here.

VELSHI: You don`t look like you`re from around here.

HINOJOSA: OK, and then suddenly…

VELSHI: Life is great. And he`s like - and they are like welcome, come
through the door. And here`s a beer for you, by the way.

VELSHI: But it`s not - you feel manipulated because we`ve probably seen a
thousand ads like this in our history, right, this celebration of the
immigrant culture that is America.

REID: But here`s the question.

HINOSA: The white guy makes it, the Latina woman and her child, the door
opens because of god.

REID: Yeah.

But, you know, I have to ask you this question, because the thing that I
saw a lot of people tweeting last night was this idea that the companies
that advertised in the Super Bowl made this
conscious decision to not advertise to red America, which is sort of the
opposite of what you guys are talking about.

But what do you make of that, that people are saying that seems like a
business decision to advertise only to blue America.

VELSHI: I`ve heard that a lot today. I don`t buy it. If you`re Bud, if
you`re Anheuser-Busch, why would you do that? That`s just a bad political
decision. If you`re AirBnB, I entirely understand that decision and I
think that`s what they did.

REID: But they are also apologizing for their own behavior.

VELSHI: Right. Right.

REID: …had a problem with this.

VELSHI: But they know where their audience sort of is. They`re also a
tech company, they`re west coast-based. They know that`s where they have
to go.

In the case of 84 Lumber, it seems a lot of the motivation was that they`re
in the lumber business where they`ve got a shortage of labor and they`re
trying to get young, conscious people to say, hey, I like this company.
It`s got a good image.

HINOJOSA: I`ll take it one step further, if anybody in Latin America was
watching that ad, they are thinking, I want to work for that company. I
think I`ll go take that trek because they actually…

VELSHI: We can get New York that`s restaurants and things like that….

HINOJOSA: They depend on undocumented immigrant labor to make the lumber
that we all – they are invisible. You never see them anywhere, because
they are in the back woods working on lumber. I think this was a ploy to
say, come over. We want your work.

REID: And you what`s amazing? I think you might have had to have lived in
some place like Florida to know just how dependent the building and
construction industry is dependent on undocumented immigrant labor, low
paid in many cases undocumented immigrant labor.

Thank you very much for that. Ali Velshi and Maria Hinojosa, wow. Thank
you very much for joining us. And that is All In for this evening. The
Rachel Maddow Show starts right this very second. Good evening Rachel and
happy Monday.