Tim Ryan wants to be answer for Democrats in Midwest. TRANSCRIPT: 4/16/19. All In w/ Chris Hayes.

Roula Allouch, Abdul El-Sayed, Masha Gessen, Tim Ryan, Barbara Boxer, Robert Reich, Tim Ryan

CHRIS HAYES, MSNBC HOST:  Tonight on All In.




DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT:  She`s got a way about her that`s very, very

bad I think for our country.


HAYES:  President attacks Congresswoman, Ilhan Omar.


TRUMP:  She is somebody that doesn`t really understand, I think, life –

real life.


HAYES: Drawing on the kind of bigotry that fueled his campaign.


TRUMP:  A total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United



HAYES:  The kind of bigotry that fuels the republican base.


BERNIE KERIK, FORMER POLICE OFFICER:  She`s infatuated with Al-Qaeda, with



HAYES:  Tonight, Trump`s words of incitement and his parties eagerness to

pump it up.  Plus .


TRUMP:  It`s called flipping and it almost ought to be illegal.


HAYES:  Why current and former Trump aids are running scared of the Mueller

Report.  And as the 2020 field continues to grow, Tim Ryan, joins me to

explain why he`s running for president.


TIM RYAN, 2020 PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE:  We need a grinder.




HAYES:  But All In starts right now.   Good evening from New York.  I`m

Chris Hayes.  Tonight a member of the United States House Representative is

receiving death threats, due she says to the actions of the president of

the United States.  And the president doesn`t care. 




UNIDENTIFIED MALE:  Congresswoman Omar since out a release last night

saying that you`re tweet from a couple of days ago has lead to direct

threats on her life.  Any second thoughts about that tweet and the way it

was produced and put together?


TRUMP:  No, not at all.




HAYES:  Not at all.  We`re going to play the rest of Trump`s response in a

moment.  Let`s take a moment to remember exactly what happened here.  The

president of the United States posted a video that took a few words by

Congresswoman Ilhan Omar completely out of context to suggest she was

playing down the September 11 attacks.


That video that he posted (inaudible) her words with images of mass murder. 

And as a result Omar said she experienced an increased in direct threats on

my life.  Many directly referencing or replying to the president`s video.


In her statement Omar also noted the disturbing finding that counties that

hosted a Trump rally in 2016 saw a 226 percent increase in hate crimes. 

That is a real study by the way, she`s citing. 


One that says something truly unnerving about how this president`s rhetoric

is received by some of his more armed (ph) supporters.  Not to the rest of

the president`s answer.




TRUMP:  Look, she`s been very disrespectful to this country.  She`s been

very disrespectful frankly to Israel.  She is somebody that doesn`t really

understand, I think, life.  Real life.  What it`s all about.  It`s

unfortunate.  She`s got a way about her that`s very, very bad, I think, for

our country.   I think she`s extremely unpatriotic and extremely

disrespectful to our country.




HAYES:  OK.  There`s a lot there.  Let`s start with the president`s claim

that Ilhan Omar doesn`t understand what quote “real life is.”  Whatever you

think of Ilhan Omar or her politics or things she said, there is one thing

about her that is indisputable.  She sure as hell knows what real life is



When she was eight years old, Omar fled Civil War in Somalia.  She then

lived in a refugee camp in Kenya for four years before making it to America

as a high school freshman.  And despite all that adversary, she eventually

rose to become a member of Congress.


Ilhan Omar was not, for the record, born to rich parents.  She did not

attend a private boarding school and get handed hundreds of millions of

dollars by her daddy via dubious tax schemes and outright fraud unlike the

man who lectures her about real life.



But it`s no surprise that Donald Trump has such contempt for Ilhan Omar. 

Trump launched his political career by harnessing anti-Muslim bigotry with

the lie that Barrack Obama was a secret Muslim born outside the country.


He went on to falsely claim he saw thousands of Muslims in New Jersey

cheering the September 11 attacks and made a wholesale rejection of one

billion Muslims worldwide the center piece of his campaign.




TRUMP:  Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of

Muslims entering the United States until our countries representatives can

figure out what the hell is going on.




HAYES:  You hear the crowd there?  That enthusiastic applause is a good

reminder that Trump is exploiting anti-Muslim sentiment that has long

existed in his party.  And Jamelle Bouie pointed out today, a 2004 poll

that found that about 40 percent of self-identified republicans said that

Muslim Americans should be required to register with the government.


A 2006 poll found wide anti-Muslim prejudice where republicans ascribing

more negative political and religious qualities to Muslims and being more

opposed to having Muslim neighbors than our democrats and independents.


Long before Trump`s presidency you could see not so thinly veiled anti-

Muslim bigotry and GOP fear mongering about Sharia law and the so called

ground zero Masque.  Today you see it manifested in the conspiracy theories

about the fire at Notre Dame, which some of the right are now suggesting

falsely was the result of an Islamic terrorist attack.


And Trump T.V. last night disgraced an ex-police commissioner convicted

felon, Bernie Kerik, flaunted his own bigotry claiming that Congresswoman

Omar is infatuated with Al-Qaeda and that Council on American-Islamic

Relations the Muslim Civil Rights group is in fact a terrorist





KERIK:  She`s infatuated with Al-Qaeda, with Hamas, Hezbollah.  She was at

CAIR at a fundraiser.  She was the keynote speaker at a fundraiser for

CAIR, which according to the United Arab Emirates in our nation, they are a

terrorist organization.




HAYES:  Joining me for a reaction, the chair of the national board of the

Council on American-Islamic Relations, Roula Allouch.  First I guess I

should have you respond to Kerik.  Though obviously it`s a fairly

slanderous statement.


ROULA ALLOUCH, CHAIR, CAIR:  Yes, thanks Chris for having me and for the

opportunity to speak on these issues.  So the statement that was just

referenced, you know CAIR is an organization that works for the civil

rights and liberties of American Muslims and by the United States

government`s own definition and clarification is not a terrorist



So as Americans we should look to what our own government says about our

organization and CAIR is very happy and honored to work with government

officials.  We often times have elected officials at our events in support

of our community and the work that we do in support of American Muslims.


HAYES:  There has been – we have seen a real pernicious anti-Muslim

bigotry in American politics in the last 18 years and even before then but

it intensified after 9/11, I think it`s fair to say.  Where do things stand

now as you watch the president doing what he`s doing and the Republican

Party and the conservative movement on Trump T.V. in the way they speak

about one of two Muslim women elected to Congress?


ALLOUCH:  I mean what we`re seeing, Chris, is such an increase in hate –

hateful attacks against Muslims and very specifically Representative Tlaib

and Omar.  Representative Omar is a courageous leader.  She`s someone who`s

speaking her truth.


As you referenced, she`s somebody who knows a lot about life.  She survived

war, she chose a new land, and she`s committed to serving as an American

and serving the American people as a representative in Congress.


And we have unfortunately people on both sides of the aisle now who aren`t

speaking out strongly enough for her and in support of her as the president

is inciting these hateful attacks on her.


HAYES:  You know that word inciting which you use and others have used and

I`ve used myself, the argument that I`ve seen from some – some of the

president`s defenders is look, politics ain`t beanbag, criticism is

criticism, she said what she said, we (inaudible) it with images of what

happened on that day.  Fair is fair.  What do you say to that?


ALLOUCH:  Well, first her words were taken out of context.  And secondly

and probably even more importantly she has reported that she`s seeing an

increase in death threats and attacks against her and to the point where

she`s not receiving attacks daily.


This is a person who`s serving our country, who`s serving as a

representative in Congress and deserves people on both sides of the aisle

to say enough is enough.  People need to let her speak her truth and speak

for herself but she shouldn`t be subjected to these increasing attacks and

– and – that are unfortunately leading to threats against her life.


HAYES:  Is – is there – how would you say things are more broadly.  I

mean obviously Ilhan Omar has become a kind of lightening rod for certain

aspects of our political system and it`s bigotries but more broadly what do

you think that this president has done in shaping the way that

conversations happen about Islam-Muslim America?


ALLOUCH:  You know Chris it`s been a really difficult time for the American

Muslim community since the campaign of 2016 as you referenced many years

before that.  But certainly since the presidential campaign and since this

president`s time in office with the Muslim ban and many other attacks on

civil rights and liberties of Muslims in many other communities.


It`s been a challenging time and Representative Omar and Representative

Tlaib being the first two Muslim women in Congress are a very great example

of good that come from difficult times and they serve as inspirations to

American Muslims and people of all faith in our country.


And so we`re honored that we have their expertise and their leadership at

time where there`s so much difficulty.


HAYES:  All right.  Roula Allouch of CAIR, thank you for your time tonight.


ALLOUCH: Thank you Chris.


HAYES:  Joining me now, Abdul El-Sayed is former Michigan gubernatorial

candidate, chair of the progressive group Southpaw Michigan and Masha

Gessen, staff writer New Yorker who wrote – who`s new piece discusses the

dangerous bullying of Ilhan Omar.  Masha, why don`t you talk about what you

wrote in that piece, what do you mean by the dangerous bulling of Ilhan



MASHA GESSEN, THE NEW YORKER STAFF WRITER:  Well, I was writing about what

I know about political violence in regimes run by autocrats or aspiring

autocrats and you know violence in such – by such leaders is often

delegated and they go after the weak.


The go after people who`s presumptive allies don`t stand by them.  And I

think that`s we`re observing.  We`re observing Donald Trump basically

painting a target on Ilhan Omar`s back by – and we`re observing

congressional democrats pointedly not standing by her.


And exposing her to extreme danger.  In a sense, you know, we don`t expect

anything else from Trump.  But I think we should be expecting more from

people who should be Omar`s allies.


HAYES:  Abdul, as someone who`s been in the arena yourself and run for

office and knows how brutal political rhetoric can be particularly in

polarized times, I want to ask you the question I just asked Roula, which

is basically what is – where are the boundaries and what – what makes

this and what the president tweeted and the way they`re treating Ilhan Omar

different than the normal parry and thrust of politics to your mind.



question we have to be asking is about how open a democracy we want.  Do we

want anybody and everybody who believes in this country to be able to stand

up and run.  And to run on the beliefs that they espouse.


And the fact of the matter is – is that what the president is doing is

using Ilhan Omar`s faith and her race as a subtext to make an argument

about certain kinds of people not belonging.  And I want to go back to

Masha`s point for a second.


Because the fact of the matter is we know that Donald Trump is the bully in

chief.  That`s – that`s not a matter of question.  The matter of question

is whether or not democrats decide that diversity is a matter of window

dressing that we like you if you`re not saying anything of if democrats are

serious about standing up for members of our party who believe in – in

potentially different ideals – and ideals.


And are willing to speak truth to power on – on challenging conversations. 

And we`re not seeing that out of the Democratic Party.  I ran for office in

2018.  I was not under the same kind of spotlight but I had to take on a

full time body guard because of the number of death threats I was getting

running for a state office.


I cannot imagine the kinds of challenges that Ilhan and her family and the

folks around her on her staff have to deal with everyday fearing for their

lives because of the incitement of this bully and the failure to stand up

on behalf of the Democratic Party leadership.


HAYES:  You know Masha, one thing that I think is – is sort of bizarrely

memory hold here is that one of the president`s more fanatical supporters,

you know, sent pipe bombs to two dozen of his most prominent political foes

just a few weeks before the election.


He (inaudible) but it was clear that he was picking out people based on who

the president was going after and the – the actions of one man, the

president isn`t responsible for that person, but it`s just a fact to the

matter that looms over all of this discussion.


GESSEN:  Exactly.  And that again, political violence in modern times is

often delegated.  It`s designated somebody as a target and showing, you

know, this person is not protected.  This person nobody is standing up to

defend this person.


And what we saw, again, over the weekend is that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi

said that she spoke to the sergeant in arms about protecting Omar but she

has not said – she has not acknowledged Omar in anyway.  She has not stood

up for Omar herself.


She`s asked someone else to protect this person.  And that – that is the

kind of protection that is not a defense.


HAYES:  Masha made the point, Abdul, about the – the ways in which Omar`s

own rhetoric is – is (inaudible) for some democrats just because on the

substantive level some of the things she said to talk about Israel they

don`t agree with or other things they don`t agree with substantively, what

do you say to people who say look, I have to keep my distance from her

politically or I don`t believe in her substantively and you want me to go

out there and vouch for her. 


EL-SAYED:  Well this party has always prided itself on being a party (ph)

of a big tent and being willing to stand up for the little guy and speak

truth the power.  And you`ve got a leader in Congresswoman Omar who is

standing up, speaking her truth, talking about issues that everybody has

run away from for a very long time. 


And what we`re seeing is that the party is not standing with her.  They`re

pushing her outside of the tent.  That`s just not OK.  You mention Cesar

Sayoc and I`ll tell you – now I`ve got a 16 month old baby girl and I

remember getting a call about the fact that we had an FBI agent come to our

house and that we were on Cesar`s watch list.


He had googled our – our name and – and our address.  And the fact of the

matter is you shouldn`t have to worry about your kids being target for

violence to run for office in this country or to serve your country.


And one more point about Congresswoman Omar.  This is a woman who`s taken

an oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the country not once when

she took office, but twice when she choice to become an American.


And that`s – that`s a choice that she – she knows well because she was

escaping the kind of challenges that she left in Somalia.  This woman

believes in this country and we`ve got to believe in her and her leadership

and we`ve got to stand with our leaders even if we might disagree with them

politically.  And the Democratic Party`s got a lot of learning to do here.


HAYES:  Masha, you know, one of the – the things we`ve watched develop

over time is the way in which the GOP and the president have used Muslims

as a kind of scapegoat, as a kind of other, and the politics of that; as

someone who has written and thought about the way those politics work, what

do you see happening here?


GESSEN:  Well I see Omar basically not behaving in the way that she`s

expected.  She is not performing humility - -


HAYES:  Right.


GESSEN:  - - in the way that a freshman Congresswoman should.  She`s not

performing gratitude in the way that an immigrant should.  And make no

mistake, what Trump is saying about her being unpatriotic about being a bad

person, he`s talking about a bad immigrant, a bad brown immigrant, a bad

Muslim immigrant who - - who`s - - who was allowed into this country and is

not being grateful enough.  I think those - - that - - those are the

implications and I`m putting it very mildly what he said.


HAYES:  Right.


GESSEN:  And - - and - - I also want to say that -  -that I don`t actually

think the - - the problem is disagreement among Democrats - - between

Democrats and - - and Omar on substantive issues.  I think that there`s

actually style disagreements.


HAYES:  Yes.  Yes.


GESSEN:  Right?  Substantive issues that she`s bringing - - bringing up

that Muslims, the - - the civil rights of Muslim Americans are trampled

including by the government.  That`s indisputable.  Things that she has

said about Israel and about Israeli influence on American politics are

indisputable.  The way she has said them has been ill advised at times. 

And her message is basically, you know what, this is - - this is how I`m

going to say it.  That may not be the most politic way of doing it but its

certainly should not be punishable by the kind of threats that she has



HAYES:  Alright. Abdul El-Sayed and Masha Gessen, thank you both for being

with me tonight.


EL-SAYED:  Thank you.


GESSEN (ph):  Thank you.


HAYES:  Next, why the impending release of the Mueller report has some

White House officials in a panic because it might reveal who talked to the

Special Council.  Fearing the president`s wrath in two minutes. 




HAYES:  Ahead of the release of a redacted version of the Mueller report on

Thursday, current and former White House officials are in a state of panic

according to exclusive reporting from NBC News.  Aides are concerned about

being exposed as Mueller`s sources for damaging information on the

president.  Experiencing what one source called quote “break down level

anxiety”.  Some 20 White House aides sat for voluntary interviews with the

Special Council after being encouraged to cooperate by the president`s

former legal team.


But now the possibility looming of new evidence incriminating the

president, staffers are worried about the consequences of sharing what they

knew.  Because we know how this president feels about so called rats, as

one former official told NBC News, they got asked questions and told the

truth.  Now they`re worried the wrath will follow.  I`m joined now by one

of the reporters who broke that story NBC News Reporter Carol Lee.  What is

the big concern here among the people in this circle?


CAROL LEE, NBC NEWS REPORTER:  The big concern is that these are officials

who were told to cooperate with the Mueller investigation by the White

House and president`s legal team.  They went and did that.  They had, in

their view, had no choice but to be completely honest.  Tell them

everything they knew and now they`re freaking out because this report is

going to come out and the president may or may not be able to determine who

told the Special Council what and things that are going to make him look

really bad.


And so they`re worried are there names going to be in this report.  Is it

going to be, you know, so and so said the president did X or is it going to

be kind of a Bob Woodward style, like who done it in terms of - -


HAYES:  Right.


LEE: - - who`s individual one - -


HAYES:  - - the things that are said in the room.


LEE:  Yes, and everyone can kind of figure it out.  And so, they`re really

worried about it because the president is a - - he is vindictive in this



HAYES:  He`s wrathful.


LEE:  Wrathful.  Yes.  Good word.  And so, you - - you know what is he

going to do?  Is he going to go after them on Twitter?  Is he going to, you

know, trying to block them from getting different gigs?  It - - who knows. 

It could run the gambit.  I mean his allies will do the same.


HAYES:  I thought that was interesting because these are not people by in

large who still work in the White House.  This was my understanding.


LEE:  No.  There`s a few that still work in the White House.


HAYES:  Right.  But it`s a big circle of people and I thought it was

interesting that they`re fearful of the president`s wrath.  Because

question of like, what would the president do to you?  And the answer is,

the president runs the Republican party at this point.  Right? 


LEE:  Right.


HAYES:  Like, if the president`s mad at you, you`re in trouble if you work

in Republican politics.


LEE:  Absolutely and he can do a lot of damage to - - and its unpleasant

(inaudible).  We`ve talked to some (inaudible), look it`s unpleasant.  You

know, he`s coming after you and he`s tearing down your reputation and it

matters.  It matters if and, you know, in terms of the work you`re trying

to do.  It just matters and I don`t know how you feel about yourself.  And

so there`s - -


HAYES:  If you let it - -


LEE:  If you - -


HAYES:  Let me play therapist for a second.  If you let it, anonymous

(inaudible) out there.  There`s - - there`s something strange that`s

happening.  So we`re two days away from this report.  Right?  So the

president`s people all run around and say, we`re vindicated.  No collusion. 

No obstruction.  Everything`s fine and yet they`re like preparing this

counter report.


LEE:  Yes.


HAYES:  A lot of people raise the question like, if a jury came back and

said you`re not guilty you wouldn`t prepare a counter report to refute said



LEE:  Well it just shows that the jury hasn`t come out - - they don`t know.


HAYES:  Right.


LEE:  I mean, that`s the, you know, so they`re putting on this face of - -

of positive spin.  The president -  -the president was clear.  He didn`t do

anything wrong.  The Barr Summary really gave him a lot of momentum and the

reality is that met - - the reality that they know is they don`t know

what`s in this report and they don`t know what it`s going to sound like and

look like and how it`s going to change the political landscape to the

extent that it does.  What its going to do to Republicans on Capitol Hill,

it call depends on what`s in there and they don`t know.  And so, they`re

preparing for all different scenarios and will calibrate depending on what

the actual report says.


HAYES:  One of the - - one of the things that there`s been a lot of focus

on is the obstruction part of this and Don McGahn and obstruction.  Do - -

have they - - do you - - do we know what they`ve been briefed on?  They`re

reporting they`ve been briefed inside that White House but do we know who`s

been briefed and what they`ve been briefed on? 


LEE:  We don`t know exactly and we don`t know and - - and I would say that

there`s a lot they don`t know.


HAYES:  Right.


LEE:  And so - -


HAYES:  So they`re walking around, the White House staff right now is

walking around and it`s a black box to them largely, other than Barr`s



LEE:  Exactly.  And that is very unsettling to them and - - and they`re

about - - they`re in this timeframe where they were riding on the high of

Barr`s Summary which gave them a lot of momentum, a lot of political

capital and they were able to spend that very positively to the president

and that`s about to potentially run out.  And so that`s why you`re seeing a

kind of freak out from people who cooperated because what`s going to come

to them and then the president`s legal team is kind of preparing for all

different types of scenarios.


HAYES:  I always think it`s a fascinating - - it`s a fascinating, sort of,

character study in that the people around the president have no idea what

he`s done or what he`ll say.  Right?  Like, at any point everyone`s

operating blind because, like, lord knows what Donald Trump has done.  They

don`t know.


LEE:  It what makes him such a difficult client if you`re a member of his

legal team and also to work for him.  Yes.


HAYES:  Yes.  Among other things.  Carol Lee.  It`s great to have you. 

Thank you.


LEE:  Thanks.


HAYES:  Ahead with the Democratic field growing and growing, Ohio

Congressman Tim Ryan joins me to talk about why he`s running for president. 

That`s next.




HAYES:  Part of what`s feeding the increase media attention to presidential

candidate Pete Buttigieg, Mayor of South Bend, Indiana is the idea that

Democrats need to win back the greater industrial Midwest to be successful

in a presidential race.  And that a candidate from that part of the

country, broadly, has the best shot at doing so.  It`s part of Minnesota

Senator Amy Klobuchar`s pitching her comparative advantage as the

presidential candidate.  It`s part of the reason why Ohio Senator Sherrod

Brown seriously flirted with a run for president before deciding not to. 


There`s another Ohio politician who is giving 2020 candidacy a real shock. 

If elected, Congressman Tim Ryan will become the first sitting member of

the House of Representatives elected to president since another Ohio

politician James Garfield did it way back in 1880.  With me now is

Congressman Tim Ryan, 2020 Democratic presidential candidate.  Good to have

you here.




HAYES:  Of all the people in the United States age 35 or above or natural

born citizens, why should you Tim Ryan be president of the United States?


RYAN:  Well first and foremost I can win.  I can rebuild that blue wall. 

The Western PA, Ohio, you must mentioned Michigan, Wisconsin but more than

that I think I understand the native economic that - - the economic needs

of people and communities like the one I represent.  And that, to me is the

essential issue in our country today.  The economic inequality, the

economic divide that we have and the fact that people are just sick of

trying to get by.  They want to thrive not just survive and that`s what I`m

going to bring to the White House.


HAYES:  When you say you understand, sort of, the - - the - - the - - you

can win.  Right?  You can rebuild the blue wall.  Could you win statewide

in Ohio?


RYAN:  Yes.


HAYES:  Tim Ryan - -


RYAN:  Yes.


HAYES:  And why not do that?


RYAN:  Ohio goes right back on the map.


HAYES:  No, I`m saying why not run for statewide office?  Why go from

running for House of - - of - - Representatives - -


RYAN:  Yes.


HAYES:  You know what I mean? 


RYAN:  Yes.  Totally.  Well I`ve been in Congress, it is my 17th year. 

I`ve been working on these Federal issues.  They`re very important to me. 

I think the - - the issues around our foreign policy, our engagement in the

world critically important.  Trade deals have been a train wreck for

communities like mine and hollowed us out.  So I don`t - - I think if you

don`t get those macro economic policies straight around trade, around

taxes, around really Federal investments around the new technologies, we`ve

been trying to piece it together in communities like Youngstown and a bunch

of others around the United States.  But if you don`t have the force of the

Federal government behind initiatives to win the future, each community in

each state`s going to struggle.


HAYES:  When you think about where the country`s headed under Donald Trump,

what do you think the worst thing that is - - that he has done as president

in this?


RYAN:  I think we`re - - we`re obviously the example he sets.  That will go

when he goes.  That example will have - - we`ll have hit the reset button. 

The economic failures.  His failure to really address the structural

changes of our economy are going to last for a long time because China is

breathing down out throats.  So he divided the country further than we were

already divided.  A divided country is a weak country and it - - it`s

preventing us from really dealing with this - - these economic challenges. 

China`s coming after us.  They have 40 percent of the electric vehicle

market.  They have 60 percent of the solar panel market.  They`re building

bases in Africa, Islands in the South China Sea.  They`re building a

railroad from Northeast China to Rotterdam.


HAYES:  But isn`t that just a zero sum version of a - - of a world view the

president himself also shares?  Right?  I mean, if you look at the

president on trade, things like NAFTA or China.  Right?  His view is, it`s

very kind of mercantilist zero sum view.  If Canada and Mexico are doing

well, we`re getting screwed?  If China`s doing well, we`re getting screwed? 

What I`m hearing from you is, it is sort of a zero sum between us and China

but it cannot be the - - the - - the case that people prosper together. 

That different countries prosper together?


RYAN:  Totally.  If the United States really has an industrial policy.  If

the United States is saying, if the president of the United States is

sitting down saying, how do we dominate the electric vehicle market?  China

has 40 percent now.  How do we win that?  How do we make those cars in the

United States?  The batteries, the charging stations, how do we make solar

panels in the United States?  Let`s compete.  Let`s go.  I`m ready to have

a competition with China.  The problem now is, China has a 10 year plan, 20

year plan, 50 year plan, 100 year plan.  We live in a 24 hour news cycle

and we`re getting our clocks cleaned.


HAYES:  Well, but they`re also - - they`re also not a democracy.  They`re -

- the - - the - - the Chinese communist party knows a thing or two about



RYAN:  Look - -


HAYES:  It`s a tough thing to replicate.


RYAN:  Yes.  OK.  Did they - - they do have adherent advantages but they

don`t have the creativity, the ingenuity, the innovation, the kind of where

with all we do to create a new economy.  We have the creative edge over

China.  Problem is, we`re not tapping into it because we`re not investing

in education.  We`re not investing in research.  We don`t have a plan

around some of these newer technologies.  These technologies are growing at

25-30 percent a year.  You take (inaudible) manufacturing, 3D printing, 3

to 5 million jobs in the next 10 years.  Let`s dominate it.  So, you don`t

get to pick your opponent. 


HAYES:  Right.


RYAN:  So our opponent is China and they have their advantages.  We have

ours.  Problem is, we`re not tapping into ours.


HAYES:  What would be, if you were elected president of the United States

and lets say through somewhat an amazing political turn of events, you had

both the House and the Senate that were Democratic majorities.  What would

be your first piece of legislation you would move?  Your first domestic

policy priority?


RYAN:  Create an industrial policy in the United States.  Really focus on

how we dominate these industries.


HAYES:  What does that look like legislatively?  Like you mean, like, a - -

a sort of infrastructure bill?  A sort of research and funding bill? 


RYAN:  I think - - think it`s got to be all of them.  Of course you`ve got

to do infrastructure, roads, bridges, kind of traditional stuff.  We`ve got

to make sure we have the high speed internet that China, once again,

killing us on 5G.  We`re stuck in 4G.  This is all part of an industrial

policy.  Pick two or three of these industries that we say we want to

dominate.  Sit down with the car companies.  Sit down with the Department

of Energy, Department of Defense, National Science Foundation, small

business.  How do you get early stage capital into some of these



HAYES:  You`re talking real industrial policy. 


RYAN:  I`m tired.  Look man. 


HAYES:  Like, we`re going to plan on these - - we`re going to -  -we`re

going to strategically put our chips behind these enterprises, in these



RYAN:  Yes.


HAYES:  That mean, how do you - - how do you - - how do you - - I`m not

saying its wrong. 


RYAN:  I mean, how do you go to the moon?  Right?  You`re like OK and then

all of these technologies spin out of that.  Who knows what - - what

batteries are going to come and I`m not saying it should be a centralized

plan, I`m saying bring in our free enterprise system. That`s our

comparative advantage to help us scale this up and it should all - - a lot

of it should be focused around decarburizing the United States and making

sure we are leading the world in reversing climate change using our

government.  Using our education, workforce and free enterprise system. 


HAYES:  Is that something that the voters in your Congressional district

can get behind, decarburizing the United States?


RYAN:  It`s jobs.  The jobs that come from it.


HAYES:  The jobs they can get from it.


RYAN:  Yes.  We - - we talk about climate.  We need to be talking about



HAYES:  This- - isn`t that the conceit of the Green New Deal is to do that. 



RYAN:  Well, yes, maybe.  Yes.  I mean, to guarantee jobs in that other

piece - -


HAYES:  Right.


RYAN:  - - but I`m saying winds are growing 20-25 percent a year.  Solar is

growing at 25-30 percent a year.  Addid (ph) is adding 3 to 5 million new

jobs in the next 10 years.  We`re going to make - - we`re going to go from

making one to two million electric vehicles in the United States to 30

million somewhere in the world, someone`s going to make those. 


HAYES:  Right.


RYAN:  I want those made in the United States and here`s the key too Chris. 

We have to do this.  The tax code, the incentives, the investments, we have

to drive them to distressed communities, to communities of color, old coal,

old steel, old auto, old rubber communities that have been left behind in

the deep south.  We`ve got to spread the wealth here.  80 percent of

Venture Capital it goes to three states, California, New York,

Massachusetts.  9 percent goes to women, less than 2 percent go to people

of color.  We`ve got to spread this out.  Everybody wants a piece of the

action and we`re going to cut these workers in on the deal.


HAYES:  Spread the wealth.  An intentional or unintentional Huey Long

reference.  Congressman Tim Ryan, Democratic presidential candidate.  Thank

you for making time.


RYAN:  Thanks for having me. 


CHRIS HAYES:  Ahead, as of right now, Senator Bernie Sanders is the current

front runner for the Democratic nomination.  Why that is reportedly

worrying some Democrats coming up.  Which Trump official can get from

confirmation to investigation the quickest.  That`s (inaudible) too.  Next.




HAYES:  Thing one tonight, how much does Donald Trump hate the swamp?  The

answer is not much at all.  You see, “Drain the Swamp” was just a thing he

said at his - - that his campaign crowds liked but as soon as he got to

Washington, he was almost cartoonish how feeted the Trump swamp got.  His

cabinet was filled with people like Ryan Zinke, Secretary of the Interior

was in the job for less than two years and managed to rack up 15

investigations into his conduct.  He resigned in disgrace and should be far

from the swamp says according the rules laid out in that pretend “Drain the

Swamp” executive order by the president. 


Executive branch appointees are banned from lobbying for five years after

leaving their government jobs.  So whatever Zinke`s doing, I`m absolutely

sure his new work is very separate from anything he did at the Department

of Interior or maybe it`s with a gold mining firm that`s pursing project

approvals involving the Department of Interior.  That`s right.  Zinke is

joining the board of U.S. Gold Corporation who`s CEO cited Zinke`s

excellent relationship with the Interior Department in explaining his



Zinke, of course, says the job would not constitute lobbying.  Of course

not.  Well the good news is that the Interior Department has a brand new

secretary now.  So all those ethic investigations are in the rearview

mirror or not and that`s thing two in 60 seconds.  So you`d think that

after he finally drained the swamp of someone as conflicted as Ryan Zinke,

President Trump would choose a squeaky clean replacement to head the

Department of Interior.  If you were watching the confirmation hearing for

his nominee, the first time that something was awry were the actual swamp

things in the audience.  Those were of course Green Peace activists

protesting Bernhardt who they call the ultimate swamp thing due to his work

as a corporate lobbyist for the oil industry and allegations that he kept

lobbying after legally declaring he had stopped.


And that he used his position to push for a pause (ph) he desired by a

former lobbying client.  Oh, and that he blocked the release of a report

showing the effects of pesticides on endangered species.  Bernhardt has so

many conflicts of interest he and I`m quoting here “has to carry a small

card listing them all” according to the Washington Post.  No, seriously. 

He keeps a card in his pocket in case he needs a cheat sheet about all his

conflicts but none of that stopped every single Republican Senator and a

few Democrats from voting to confirm Bernhardt last week as our new

Secretary of Interior.


That was last Thursday.  And then yesterday, just two four days later, the

Interior Departments internal watchdog opened an investigation into the

brand new Secretary David Bernhardt.  Come on down.  Welcome.  That follows

requests from eight Senators from four government ethics watchdog groups. 


PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP:  We need to finish exactly what we came here to do. 

Drain the Swamp.




HAYES:  Last Monday, ICE agents pulled over Jose Gonzalez Carranza at 5:30

in the morning, less than a block from his home, as he was on his way to

his welding job.  He said half a dozen ICE agents approached the car in

military style gear with weapons drawn, yelling hands up and led him away

to be processed for deportation, and left behind a 12-year-old daughter who

is an American citizen and who lives with her grandparents. 


Her mom wasn`t able to be there because she was killed in Afghanistan as a

member of the U.S. Army when she was 22.  Army Private First Class Barbara

Vieyra was mortally wounded when insurgents attacked her unit using an

improvised explosive device and a rocket-propelled grenade fire in Kunar

Province, Afghanistan, the Pentagon said at the time. 


In other words, the Trump administration decided to send armed ICE agents

to arrest and deport the widower of a U.S. service member killed in the

line of duty.  A man who is father to a U.S. citizen and who, according to

his lawyer, has committed no crime other than being out of status. 


Gonzalez Carranza was even granted a legal reprieve by an immigration judge

after his wife was killed, and an immigration judge ended deportation

proceedings against him.  But get this, ICE, for reasons that are unclear,

re-filed the case against him in 2017, and the judge ordered him deported

in December after he missed his court hearing. 


Gonzalez Carranza`s lawyer says he never knew about the hearing because ICE

sent the notice to the wrong address. 


After three days in custody, he shipped off to Mexico.  And he would still

be there in Mexico away from his daughter were not for reporters from the

“Arizona Republic” who picked up the story, published his account, and

managed to do the nearly impossible, which is to shame the Trump

administration over the cruelty of their immigration policy.  Gonzalez

Carranza was allowed to re-enter the U.S. at the Nogales port of entry and

he made his way back to his home. 


His lawyer says Gonzalez Carranza never should have been deported in the

first place because the day he was arrested, his lawyer filed a motion to

reopen the case, which triggers an automatic state of removal. 


Now, the story here is a reminder about the things to focus with respect to

this administration`s immigration policy. 


Number one, as Adam Serwer of “The Atlantic” wrote, the cruelty is the

point.  The contempt they have for immigrants and families and loved ones

is both genuine and also routinely performed in order to create an

atmosphere that they hope will drive people away and keep people out and

make their most bigoted and wrathful supporters feel big and tough. 


Number two, even as shameless as they are, they are bound by political

gravity.  We saw this when massive uproar and protest forced them against

their will to suspend the monstrous child separation policy.  We see it

here – when outcry over the deportation of the widower of a fallen soldier

forced them to back track.  Which means as shameless and insulated as they

may be from outrage as much as they may enjoy triggering the libs, the

outrage still does work. 




HAYES:  This item in “The New York Times” today is a perfect microcosm of

the dynamic surrounding Bernie Sanders in these Democratic primaries.  Big

headline about panic among certain anti-Sanders forces in the Democratic

coalition, that is early strong polling and nearly boundless fundraising

ability is going to make him hard to stop. 


The article even includes a quote from operative David Brock agonizing over

the fact going after Sanders only gives him ammunition for more fund-

raising to his enormous list of supporters.  “You can see him reading the

headlines now,” Mr. Brock mused.  “Rich people don`t like me.” 


And then, sure enough, an hour later, this email from Sanders` campaign to

his supporter saying, “The Democratic establishment and high-dollar donors

are already planning how to stop our campaign.  They`re terrified of our

movement as they should be.”


Sanders who`s not a member of the Democratic Party has often clashed with

the party in his long political career, has both the most strained

relationship with the institutional Democratic Party and is also as of this

moment unless and until things change the front-runner for the same party`s



Joining me now are two veterans of the Democratic Party.  Barbara Boxer,

former U.S. senator from California, and now host of “The Boxer” podcast,

and Robert Reich, former secretary of labor in the Clinton administration,

now the chancellor and professor of public policy at U.C. Berkeley. 


Senator Boxer, let me start with you.  There`s never been a dynamic like

this in the party.  There`s been insurgent and such, but the relationship

between the sort of institutional party and Bernie Sanders strikes me as

distinct.  What do you think? 



you`ll find that it has happened before.  Having said that, it should never

happen again.  And, you know, I learned through a lot of hard knocks in all

the years I was in office, 40 years in office, avoid self-inflicted wounds. 

If you don`t like Bernie, pick a candidate and go. 


HAYES:  Right. 


BOXER:  And, you know – and also, this attack on the so-called

establishment, I don`t get that, either.  Who`s the establishment?  Nancy

Pelosi?  She`s as progressive as they come.  The head of the DNC, Tom

Perez?  He`s as progressive.  And the leadership in Congress. 


So, all of this is ridiculous.  It`s a self-inflicted wound if it

continues.  People should knock it off and let this campaign go forward. 

May the best person win this race. 


HAYES:  You know, one of the interesting bets being made here by Sanders,

it strikes me, Robert, is about how Democratic primary voters, and how the

grassroots feels about the institutional Democratic Party.  I think he`s

making a bet that they`re frustrated or feeling alienated from them which

is a bet that Donald Trump made that paid off very well for him, obviously,

back in 2016. 


But I`m not sure the relationship between rank and file Democratic primary

voters is the same.  What do you think? 


ROBERT REICH, FORMER SECRETARY OF LABOR:  Well, here`s the thing – first

of all, I agree completely with Senator Boxer.  The last thing the

Democratic Party needs or progressives need is what Barack Obama called a

circular firing squad.  I mean, we`ve got to stay together in order to get

Donald Trump out of office.  That`s the most important thing.


Now, in terms of grassroots versus establishment, grassroots in terms of –

or big money, there is an issue.  It transcends the Democratic Party, it

transcends progressivism, it really is throughout the United States, we see

more and more concentration of wealth and power at the top.


Now, this doesn`t mean there has to be a fight inside the Democratic Party

but we do have to understand that one of the big problems facing this

country right now, politically and socially and economically, is we`ve got

a different kind of economy, where political power and great wealth at the

top are connected.  We got to fight that. 


HAYES:  Let me reply to – I want to get your response from both of you on

this about avoiding a circular firing squad.  I hear this from Democrats

all the time.  They`re anxious about sort of that, they`re anxious about

the primary for that reason. 


And one of the things I think of is the Republican primary in 2016 was the

ugliest thing I`ve ever seen.  I mean, they were talking about the

president`s endowment during a debate.  That was a debate point with Marco

Rubio.  OK? 


And, yet, look what happened.  Like, they won the election as dirty and

nasty as it got.  I guess I wonder, like, Senator Boxer, what do you take

away as the lesson here about what makes for a good or bad primary in

choosing – in choosing a nominee?  


BOXER:  Listen, we`ve got some incredible people running, and all of this

is a big distraction.  And comparing it to what happened with Trump, I

don`t even want to go there.  It was the ugliest thing I ever saw. 


HAYES:  Right, but it worked. 


BOXER:  Well, it worked – it didn`t work for the country.  Let`s be clear. 


And frankly, I don`t think it worked for the Republican Party.  I think

that party is dying.  But that`s a whole other topic. 


I think right now, we`ve got to move forward with this, let each candidate

put his or her, you know, issues out there.  As I look at the field, I find

it interesting.  I think Bernie`s doing very well.  And I think that means

it`s OK for Joe Biden now to run because the age is no longer a factor. 


You`re going to have happy warriors.  You`re going to have angry warriors. 

You`re going to have people who are single issue.  It`s going to be

fabulous, but we don`t need these letters back and forth from – to the so-

called establishment which, again, I don`t know what that means. 


And to Bob`s point, he`s right about too much money in politics.  Those are

the rules and some candidates decided to walk away from the big money, and

some candidates are using it.  Frankly, I think, it`s critical for the



But right now, we need to talk about the people.  We need to make sure that

as Nancy Pelosi says, whoever is our nominee is for the people.  Not for

some ideology.  Not for some special interests, but for the people. 


So, let the people decide and stop the circular firing squad.  That`s –

that`s my perspective. 


HAYES:  Robert, what do you think about the idea that a nasty primary, if

it happens, isn`t necessarily a fatal or bad thing in the political

prospects of a political party? 


REICH:  Well, I think there`s a difference between Democrats and

Republicans on this, Chris.  Republicans, by temperament and tradition, are

more authoritarian.  They follow the leader.  Once the leader is

established, they all line up and they take that Hill. 


I mean, you can see in the Republican Party in the Senate right now, Mitch

McConnell is basically a lap dog to Donald Trump. 


HAYES:  Right. 


REICH:  And the Democrats are different.  The Democrats basically, you

know, everybody sings their own tune.  And when they fall out, if there`s a

big fallout, if there`s a big fight, it`s very hard for people to get back



One out of ten people who voted for Bernie Sanders in the 2016 primaries –

I mean, they voted for Donald Trump in the general election.  And I think

that that is partly, partly, this is what I want to respond to the senator

about, partly this is a response to the fact that big money is something

that is infecting and corrupting both parties and we got to organize

ourselves so we are not dependent on big money. 


HAYES:  Yes, one of the things that`s happened – Senator, go ahead. 


BOXER:  But could I just say, I mean, to say that money is the big issue

for those people, that they voted for Donald Trump, who, you know, is God

knows what he`s taken –


HAYES:  Right. 


BOXER:  – you know, on the side during this whole thing with the

Emoluments Clause being avoided and the rest of it.  It`s kind of a joke. 


REICH:  Oh, it`s a complete joke.  I mean –




BOXER:  I think –


REICH:  He`s a Trojan horse for big money. 


BOXER:  Yes, I hear you.  But I think they just wanted to rip it up.  You

know, let`s just tear it down, rip it up. 


And that`s why they went that way and it was, you know, very, very sad for

the country, and they have to look inside themselves and decide whether

that was the right thing for them to do.  No matter what I say, it`s not

going to change what`s in their heart. 


HAYES:  All right.  Barbara Boxer, and Robert Reich, thank you both for

your time tonight.  I appreciate it. 


REICH:  Thanks, Chris. 


BOXER:  Thanks. 


HAYES:  That is ALL IN for this evening. 


“THE RACHEL MADDOW SHOW” starts right now. 


Good evening, Rachel.









Copyright 2019 ASC Services II Media, LLC.  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 ASC Services II Media, LLC. You may not alter

or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the