Warren exit TRANSCRIPT: 3/5/20, All In w/ Chris Hayes

Gretchen Whitmer, Nina Turner, Ron Klain, Jelani Cobb, Alicia Garza, Bonnie Castillo, Andrea Bernstein


said Bernie Sanders, if you nominate him could be a risk and they hit the

brakes, Democratic voters hit the brakes. Whether they let up or press down

harder, that`s what we`re going to find out. Thanks for being with us

tonight. Don`t go anywhere. “ALL IN” with Chris Hayes is up next.






SEN. ELIZABETH WARREN (D-MA): I will not be running for president in 2020.


HAYES: 2020 is now a two-man race.



the Democratic nomination and a shot to beat Donald Trump.


JOE BIDEN (D), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: The President does not want me to be

the nominee.


HAYES: Tonight, where Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders stand and the legacy of

Elizabeth Warren`s candidacy.


SANDERS: All those little girls are going to have to wait four more years.

That`s going to be hard.


HAYES: Then the failure of the Trump administration on coronavirus as the

president It suggests it would be fine for people with the virus to go to




they get better.


HAYES: And new evidence that Jared Kushner made a tremendous amount of

money thanks to a policy he pushed in the White House.


TRUMP: He works for nothing, just so – you know, nobody ever reports that,

but he gets zero.


HAYES: When ALL IN starts right now.




HAYES: Good evening from New York. I`m Chris Hayes. It is effectively a

two-man race the Democratic nomination. Earlier today, Senator Elizabeth

Warren announced she was suspending her campaign in an appearance outside

her home in Cambridge, Massachusetts. She declined to make an endorsement

the race but addressed why she thought she was not ultimately able to

resonate more with voters across the country.




WARREN: You know, I was told at the beginning of this whole undertaking,

that there are two lanes, a progressive lane, that Bernie Sanders is the

incumbent for in a moderate lane that Joe Biden is the incumbent for, and

there was no room for anyone else in this. I thought that wasn`t right but

evidently, I was wrong.




HAYES: I should tell you; Elizabeth Warren will be speaking to Rachel

Maddow in Boston just about an hour from now. You definitely want to catch

that. Bernie Sanders and Joe Biden are now really the only two options left

for Democrats. The Sanders campaign is trying to figure out how to reach

out to Warren to win her endorsement.


Bernie Sanders himself has been very complimentary tweeting today. “Without

her the progressive movement would not be nearly as strong as it is today.

I know that she`ll stay in this fight and we are grateful that she will.”

So as Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a Sanders surrogate who

wrote, “Elizabeth Warren is a progressive lion, a champion for working

families, and her commitment to inclusivity is exemplary. Thank you for

being a role model.”


Obviously, the Sanders camp feels that a Warren endorsement would help

them. They`re probably right. Joe Biden tweeted, “Elizabeth Warren is the

fiercest of fighters for middle-class families. We needed her voice in this

race and we need her continued work in the Senate.” I should note that some

people interpreted that bid about the Senate as a signal that she would not

be on his V.P. list.


Biden and Sanders are preparing now for a bunch of important primaries in

just five days. Sanders` campaign announcing today they`re canceling a

speech in Mississippi which votes on Tuesday to focus on Michigan, a state

where Sanders did quite well last time. Last night, Bernie Sanders spoke to

Rachel Maddow about his campaign`s failure so far to turn out and mass the

youth vote that is so crucial to his electoral performance.




RACHEL MADDOW, MSNBC HOST: Why are fewer young people turning out in 2020

with you on the ballot?


SANDERS: I mean, what I will tell you is that in Iowa, we tripled – we

increase by 33 percent the number of young people who are participating.

I`m not dealing with these statistics. I really haven`t seen them. But it

is no – look, this is the challenge that we have. We have the lowest voter

turnout of almost any major country on Earth, less than 60 percent. Poor

people in America by very big numbers do not vote.


How do we bring them into the political process? Why do they not vote? Why

are young people not voting? This is tough stuff. And you`re right. We are

trying to do that. I understand that it is easier to bring older people

who`ve been voting for their whole lives, but we are working really hard to

try to bring people out. I think in the general election, we will be





HAYES: Joe Biden, on the other hand, continues to rack up endorsements from

the official Democratic Party consolidating behind him. The latest

endorsement is a key one, Michigan governor Gretchen Whitmer, who in 2018

defeated a Sanders-backed candidate in that primary before winning the

general election by almost 10 points, and she joins me now.


Governor, why did you choose now to endorse Joe Biden who`s been in the

race for a year?


GOV. GRETCHEN WHITMER (D-MI): I`ve been watching the race like Americans

all over the country. I`ve been watching to see how this race played out.

There were some phenomenal, talented people on the stage at the beginning.

They – we`ve seen how this has changed.


And in this moment, people across my state are asking me what I`m going to

do. They want to know. And as I`ve looked at the race, I know that when the

chips were down, when Michigan needed a champion, it was Barack Obama and

Joe Biden that had our backs during the auto rescue.


I know that healthcare is personal for me and for so many people in my

state. We expanded Medicaid here to almost 700,000 people, and that was

because of the work that Barack Obama and Joe Biden did on the Affordable

Care Act. And so, this is personal. And I think that the hard work that Joe

Biden has put in over the years, the dedication to causes that resonate and

really impact and improve people`s lives in this state were reasons that I

thought this is now the time to tell people that I am voting for and

supporting Joe Biden.


HAYES: One of the arguments that was made in 2016 about that narrow loss by

Hillary Clinton in the state of Michigan, which was about 10,000 votes and

somewhat surprising, I think, was that a key issue in that race was trade.

That Donald Trump had come out against the TVP and NAFTA and he was

attacking Hillary Clinton on that. She, of course, had supported both those



People say, you know, Joe Biden has been sort of consistently a kind of

pro-trade deal legislator. Bernie Sanders has been opposed to them. Do you

worry about that? Do you think that`s going to matter in a general



WHITMER: Well, I do you think records matter. Of course. And everyone needs

to defend the record. But the fact of the matter is, you know, when the

chips were down, it was the Obama-Biden administration that came to the

defense of the auto industry. It saved our national economy, and certainly

was personal to so many Michiganders.


When we needed a champion who was going to turn their grief into a cause to

expand health care to people, that`s what we got out of the Obama-Biden

presidency and vice presidency. We know Joe and more importantly, Joe knows

Michigan. He`s been there when we needed him. And that`s exactly what we`re

looking for in leaders.


You know, the blueprint I use in 2018 was to show up. So state focused on

the dinner table issues, to talk about building bridges not walls, and to

ensure that we have a vision and we show up and get the work done. And

that`s exactly what Joe Biden is doing. That`s what he`s all about. That`s

why I think his record is going to resonate with Michiganders and across

the country.


Final question to you. You were one of a crop of Democratic women elected

in 2018 both across country and in your state of Michigan in several

extremely talented women in congressional races that won very hard-fought a

contest as long – as well as your race which you won by 10 points, a

fairly convincing victory.


What do you make of the fact that this race which started out with more

women in it on the Democratic side than any race in history is now bereft

of that, with the exception of Tulsi Gabbert who`s still running. Does it -

- how do you feel looking at that reality today?


WHITMER: Well, obviously as Elizabeth Warren`s statement today. And it`s

sad. You know, I really would love to see a woman president in my lifetime,

soon in my lifetime. And I think that Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, Pete

Buttigieg, you know, Cory Booker brought some important voices, and

aspects, and perspective to the debate.


And that`s why I feel proud to be a part of you know, what the effort to

help Joe because I know that he will set a table where everyone has a seat.

He will build a coalition, and really, I think set an agenda that helps

improve the lives of Americans everywhere. I do want to see a woman

president in my lifetime, and I think the world of Elizabeth Warren. But at

this point, our focus is on what is going to, you know, what would be the

best interest for the people of our country and for the state of Michigan.

And I believe that Joe Biden offers the vision that we need right now.


HAYES: All right, Michigan governor Gretchen Whitmer, thank you so much for

making time this evening. I really appreciate it.


WHITMER: Thank you.


HAYES: Joining me now for more on the state of the race, Nina Turner, co-

chair of the 2020 Bernie Sanders presidential campaign. Announcement today

from the Sanders campaign about not doing a speech in Mississippi and said

going to Michigan. Some people, I think, interpreting that as a kind of cut

your losses in parts of the south where Senator Sanders has struggled a

bit, particularly in Alabama and South Carolina. Is that a fair

interpretation? What would you say to that?



it that way, Chris. I mean, we`re still going to have events there. We have

some of our national surrogates that are going to be there. Mr. Danny

Glover will be there. We have the mayor of Jackson, Mississippi, Mayor

Lumumba as you know, who was endorsed the senator. So there will be

activities going on this weekend in Mississippi, particularly in Jackson,

Mississippi. So no, they should not interpret it that way.


HAYES: There`s been reporting about the ways in which the Sanders campaign

is thinking about its message right now down the stretch. Now it is a two-

man race and there was an ad just cut was showing Senator Sanders with

President Obama, and Obama speaking very highly of him, and sense that some

of the message has to be changed a bit to bring in some voters that aren`t

yet in the Sanders coalition. You think that`s a fair assessment of where

things stand?


TURNER: Our entire campaign has been about building coalitions and bringing

new people in. As you play the clip of the Senator interviewing with

Rachel, you know, he talks about that all the time ad nauseam in terms of

bringing new people in. What would help the Democratic Party be a vibrant

Democratic Party is really having a big 10 and bringing people in.


So you know, highlighting that even more and making it very clear, you

know, as other folks that even President Obama talked or spoke very highly

of Senator Bernie Sanders.


HAYES: There`s a lot of reporting today about Elizabeth Warren and the

possibility of an endorsement. Would you welcome an endorsement from

Senator Warren? Is that something that you`re actively seeking?


TURNER: Certainly, we welcome that. It is time for the progressives to

coalesce. It is my hope and the hope of many in this movement. You know,

even people who`ve supported Senator Warren, their hope too is that both

senators will come together. The moderates have certainly come together in

very strong fashion, and we do need the progressive wing of the party to

unite as well.


HAYES: What does morale like in your campaign? Obviously, it was a

whirlwind 72 hours. There was a week between Nevada and South Carolina

where Sanders was quite clearly the front runner. There was a question

about the viability of Joe Biden heading in South Carolina. Obviously, that

big win in – on Saturday in South Carolina turned things around. Super

Tuesday went fairly well, quite well for Joe Biden`s expectations. How do

you feel about where things stand right now?


TURNER: We feeling fine, you know, no matter what they throw at us. I mean,

Chris, they – all of the moderates, all of the establishment Dems had to

come together to make this happen. Senator Sanders has always been very

clear, our movement has been clear, that when you are trying very hard to

bend the body politic towards the will of the everyday people of this

nation, the status quo gets nervous. And that`s what we`re seeing.


So we are ever more determined. You know, we`re still continuing to

persists. We are excited about going into the next phase of this campaign.

As you know, Senator Bernie Sanders did win Michigan last time. You know,

you have the new governor on, Governor Whitmer. Senator Sanders endorsed



She asked him to come out and help her in the general knowing his position

on issues like Medicare for all even though he had backed Dr. Sayed –

Abdul Sayed, as you know, who is for single-payer, he still came out

because he knew it was important to defeat the Republican in that race, and

you know, trying to proceed or follow I should say, the governor who is –

who was responsible Governor Snyder, for the Flint water crisis.


Senator Sanders, Chris has been to Michigan many times. Not only did he

come into that state to talk to the people who are most impacted by the

Flint water crisis, he even came back after that. He stood up against trade

deals that hurt states like Michigan and also my home state of Ohio where

people lost countless jobs and are still reeling from that even to this

day. So Michiganders voted for Senator Sanders last time and we`re working

very hard to win that state again.


HAYES: All right, Nina Turner, thank you for making time tonight.


TURNER: Thanks, Chris.


HAYES: Joining me now for more on where we stand now and what Elizabeth

Warren`s exit means, Michelle Goldberg op-ed columnist for New York Times

and MSNBC Political Analyst and her husband, disclosure, works as an

advisor for the Warren campaign, although we don`t have that disclosed.



time we`re going to make that disclosure.


HAYES: Yes. It`s the last time we`re going to do that. What do you think? I

mean, I think it`s a gut punch. You know, it`s really heartbreaking. It`s

heartbreaking that this campaign started out with so much promise. There

was that picture going around today of you know, that early photograph of

all of those women who might become president to have it end up.


You know, I`ve had to over the course of this campaign explain to my

kindergarten daughter why there has never been a woman president and kind

of, you know – and she`s been incredulous, you know, because Elizabeth

Warren is who our family supports, has, you know, thought that Elizabeth

Warren was going to be the first one.


I think it is – it`s so – it`s extremely painful in part because of why

she lost. I mean, I think there`s people who oppose Elizabeth Warren on the

merits, for sure. You hear all over this country, you talk to people who

say, well, I would love to vote for her. I would love to support her. But I

don`t think the country is ready, right?


And so we`ve been so traumatized by Donald Trump`s election that you have

to deal with both sexism and the perception of other people`s sexism, and I

don`t see how you get beyond that. I feel like we were in some ways we`ve

been set back even further than we were in 2015 when the possibility of a

female president still seemed exciting and fresh.


HAYES: One thing that has been striking to me is that for all of the – if

you go back to when Joe Biden announced he was entering the race, and it

was unclear whether he would, basically this – it was Joe Biden, the

favorite with a strong number two from Bernie Sanders. And a lot of things

happened over the course of the last year.




HAYES: But yet, here we are. And in some ways, it`s like – it`s what

Warren said I thought quite astutely. She said, look, this is what people

told me. There`s – basically there`s a Biden lane, and there`s a Sanders

lane, and there`s no room between. And it`s remarkable the way that that

has ended up shaking out.


GOLDBERG: I think, you know, in Sanders – both Sanders and Biden

supporters have this – it`s not just that they support the candidate, they

also support the candidate`s theory of the electorate, right? Sanders`

supporters believe that there are all these people out there waiting to go

to the polls, if only they hear a progressive enough message. Joe Biden

supporters believe that he`s electable and then kind of ping pong around

the middle.


You have all these people who just want to defeat Trump, right? You know,

the house is on fire and putting out the fire is so much more important

than what you`re going to build afterwards. So in a lot of ways, we`ve had

these debates that have been sort of recursive because we debate the kind

of finer points of these various health care problems. But what people are

evaluating is not so much how is this healthcare going to affect me, it`s

how are other people going to evaluate this health care plan, and will they

be electable afterwards.


HAYES: Or how will this person making the case for their health care plan

play in a debate against Donald Trump making the case for their health care

plan, as opposed to the health care plan?


GOLDBERG: Right. And so, you know – I mean, then you have – you have, you

know, a lot of black voters in South Carolina who want to vote for a

candidate who white voters will find acceptable. You have a lot of white

voters who are excited because all of a sudden Joe Biden has all of this

black support, right? Everybody just wants to find the person who can end

this you know, really hellish nightmare that we`re living through.


And what scares me, what scares me to death is that this process is not the

right way to find the person who is actually going to do that. I mean,

there`s almost a kind of Greek tragedy in it.


HAYES: Yes, there`s a fear deep in people that that is the case. Michelle

Goldberg, thank you very much.


GOLDBERG: Thank you.


HAYES: Up next, just how much is the Trump administration bungling the

coronavirus response. The man who spearheaded the response to the latest

Ebola outbreak joins me right here at this table next.




HAYES: The biggest failure of the Trump administration response to

coronavirus has been the lack of testing on the scale needed. They

announced this week with great fanfare, they`re going to have over a

million coronavirus tests available at the end of the week. And at that

time they announced that, it was obviously false.


Anyone who knows anything new that logistical obstacles were too big to get

there by the end of the week. And then today, guess what, senators

confirmed we aren`t going to be testing it anywhere near that scale.

Republican Rick Scott admitting there won`t be a million people to get a

test by the end of the week. It`s way smaller than that.


Now it`s defensible to not be scaling up to a million this week, but what

is not defensible is that the lack of testing we have means we do not know

how many cases there really are in the United States. Again, Centers for

Disease Control says that there are just 99 total cases in the country with

13 states reporting cases. NBC News has found the numbers are higher, at

least 226 cases at last count in 21 states.


And what has been clear from the beginning is the President of the United

States isn`t really primarily interested in dealing with the virus itself

as a first order problem. No, he is interested in spinning it to preserve

his political standing and the standing of the economy. And last night, he

was doing a doozy of it on Trump T.V.




UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We have for today the global death rate at 3.4 percent,

and a report that the Olympics could be delayed. Your reaction to that?


TRUMP: Well, I think the 3.4 percent is really a false number now, and this

is just my hunch. And – but based on a lot of conversations with a lot of

people that do this – because a lot of people will have this and it`s very





HAYES: Now, there is a responsible way to communicate what the president

said, which is that the 3.4 percent mortality rate is not consistent across

all countries, which probably has to do with a lack of testing. In South

Korea where they`re doing a ton of testing more than anywhere else in the

world, the fatality rate there reportedly appears to be hovering around

0.65 percent, much better. That is hopefully what we will end up having

here. But you can`t just dismiss the World Health Organization figure based

on a hunch.


And then the president says something unbelievably revealing about people

who have the virus and don`t need intensive medical care.




TRUMP: If you know, we have thousands or hundreds of thousands of people

that get better just by, you know, sitting around and even going to work,

some of them go to work, but they get better.




HAYES: That`s the president blindly suggesting going to work with the

coronavirus which, listen to me, do not go to work with the coronavirus,

OK. Joining me now Ron Klain who served as the U.S. Ebola response

coordinator under President Obama. Testing continues to be a real problem

even after the announcement they were sending out these kits. How do you

assess overall, the responses administration so far?



think you have to give you the response a pretty low grade. I think C-minus

or D-plus, whatever you want to put on it, for a couple of reasons, Chris.

They focused on travel restrictions to delay the arrival of the virus. And

we could talk about would that work or not, but what it bought was time.

That`s only a valid strategy if you use that time to ramp up.


So yeah, it was reasonable that on Monday when they said there`d be a

million tests by Friday, no one should believe that. But there should have

been a million tests way before Friday because we knew in December and

early January this was coming, and why did we start really just working on

this problem this week.


The same thing with hospital capacity, and all the other aspects of this,

the response is moving slowly, it`s starting late, and that`s inexcusable.


HAYES: The President had this – he talked about his sort of bragging about

the numbers today. There are two tweets. So in one tweet, he called you a

lightweight Washington failure and was mad about the swine flu and a lot of

people dying that. And then another, he said, look, we`ve only got 129

cases and 11 deaths, we are working very hard to keep these numbers as low

as possible.


And it struck me that that was a very revealing sentence, we are working

very hard to keep these numbers as low as possible. It`s the numbers. But

if you`re not testing, that`s one way of keeping the numbers low.


KLAIN: Yes, I mean, it`s like a double entendre tweet, which is what

they`re doing to keep the numbers low is being slow about testing. And in

the end, you can`t hide sick people under the sofa, OK. We are going to

have to find these people, treat them, get them into the healthcare system,

get them well, isolate those cases the extent possible. And if you don`t

test you don`t know.


He is focused on numbers. He`s focused on the stock market being up and the

case count being down. Those are the two wrong things to focus on. You

should be focusing on getting people tested, surveillance, finding out

where this is, and getting hospitals ready to deal with the inflow of



HAYES: So, one thing I want to be clear on in our coverage of this is that

the idea that the individual risks when American is low is correct. There`s

330 million people in this country. Even if we were facing an equally sized

outbreak, which is large, you know, that would be, you know, 25,000 cases,

right there? They`ve got about 5,000 cases on 60 million people. So, again,

in the relative scheme of things, the risks though is to the healthcare

system. Explain why that is.


KLAIN: Well, first of all, I do think the risk of number of cases could be

a lot higher than that. They`re testing in Italy, but not testing in nearly

as much as they should be also. And so I don`t think we – I think the

fairest thing to say about the number of cases is we don`t know.


HAYES: We don`t know.


KLAIN: I mean, that`s – I think we should begin and end with that, OK.

Now, it`s going to be a number, a pretty big number in the end – and our

healthcare system is fragile, right? It runs at capacity. We don`t have

hospitals just sitting empty waiting for coronavirus patients to show up.

So if you put stress on that system by disorganized response by people in

particular city, whatever city it is, flooding into hospitals, flooding

into emergency rooms, that will one, really collapse the capacity of those

hospitals and emergency rooms.


It may infect doctors, nurses, and frontline healthcare workers. And those

things will take down part or a lot of a healthcare system in a particular

area. So even if you don`t get coronavirus, if you need to go to that

hospital to get treatment for a heart attack –


HAYES: Right. And there are no beds or no respirators.


KLAIN: – and there are no beds, or the nursing populations down a lot

because they`re sick or the doctors are out because they`re sick, that`s

going to have effect on all of us even if you never ever get coronavirus.


HAYES: How much was communication straightforward, honest, clear, fact-

based communication important to you when you were coordinating the Ebola



KLAIN: Look, it was very important. And ironically, that`s one reason why I

didn`t go on T.V. at all the first month of the Ebola response. We put Tony

Fauci on television, but Tom Friedman on television. The American people

should hear from experts, from the people who know the medicine, who have

been career officials who could – Tony Fauci served six U.S. presidents

back to Ronald Reagan. He fought AIDS, he fought malaria, followed by kinds

of diseases.


People should hear from him directly about the facts and the truth. He now

has to go in events with the president and correct the president when he

misleads people in real-time. He`s like a real-time fact-checking. That`s

not the way this should work.


HAYES: What is your hope that you see happen in this response you haven`t



KLAIN: So I think two things really have to be fixed. We have a problem

with competence, we have a problem of confidence and we need to fix both.

On competence, we need to ramp up the testing. There`s just no way around

that. And secondly, we need to get the touchpoints of our healthcare

system, the intake points ready for these cases so that we don`t collapse

healthcare system in particular areas, particular systems. That`s the

competence part.


The confidence side, the president needs to put down the iPhone, needs to

stop saying ridiculous things on camera, and let public health authorities

brief people and tell us the truth.


HAYES: Final question. Has the White House or anyone in the White House

reached out to you for your expertise?


KLAIN: I haven`t talked to any senior people at the White House. I continue

to talk to career people throughout the government who worked with me on

Ebola response. You know, those career people, what Donald Trump disparages

as the deep state, are what`s going to protect us and save us in a

situation like this.


HAYES: All right, Ron Klain, thank you so much.


KLAIN: Thank you, Chris.


HAYES: Coming up, the plea from a nurse who`s now quarantined after

treating a patient with coronavirus in California and isn`t getting tested.

That`s next.




HAYES:  As Coronavirus spreads in the United States, the nation`s testing

capabilities are not keeping pace. Tonight, the largest union of registered

nurses, National Nurses United, is raising alarms that members of their

union are being denied testing after potentially contracting Coronavirus

from infected patients. Joining me now is Bonnie Castillo, a registered

nurse, and executive director of National Nurses United.


And Ms. Castillo, you have a member who wrote a letter today, and I

wondered if you could give the context for that letter?



We have over 80 registered nurses under quarantine, and that list is

growing daily. And we had a nurse who wanted to express her experience and

convey her concern with regards to the bureaucracy of the testing and the

fact that she has not been able to get testing, despite having cared for a

positive patient.


HAYES:  I`m wondering if you could actually just read that letter, because

I found it really powerful. Would that be all right?


HAYES:  Yes. Yes.


So this is the statement from the quarantined nurse from a northern

California facility. “As a nurse, I`m very concerned that not enough is

being done to stop the spread of Coronavirus. I know because I am currently

sick and under quarantine after caring for a patient who tested positive. I

am waiting permission from the federal government to allow for my testing,

even after my physician and county health professional ordered it. I

volunteered to be on the care team for this patient, who we knew was

positive, I did this because I had all the recommended protective gear and

training from my employer. I did this assuming that if something happened

to me, of course I, too, would be cared for. Then what was a small concern

after a few days of caring for this patient became my reality, I became



“When employee health told me that my fever and other symptoms fit the

criteria for potential Coronavirus, I was put on a 14-day quarantine. Since

that criteria was met, the testing would be done.


“My doctor ordered the test through the county. The public county officer

called me and verified my symptoms and agreed with testing, but the

national CDC would not initiate testing. They said that they would not test

me because if I were wearing the recommended protective equipment, then I

wouldn`t have the Coronavirus. What kind of science-based answer is that?

What a ridiculous and uneducated response from the department that is in

charge of our country`s health.”


HAYES:  So obviously there are huge concerns that are outlined here. I

wonder if this is concern that you`re hearing from other members as well

about front-line health care workers like your members whether they have

the right protective equipment, the right training and access to testing?


CASTILLO:  Correct.


So, first off I would say that, you know, we have the education, the

training, the expertise to treat COVID-19 patients. And we know that we

could actually even – we could stop the spread of the disease, but only if

we have the protection that we need, and that includes appropriate testing

when appropriate.


So for us, it`s very concerning that there isn`t a coordinated systemic

approach to this. And it takes leadership. It takes leadership at all

levels, at the federal, state and local levels.


HAYES:  Do you think that leadership is absent right now?


CASTILLO:  We see that the leadership is discordant, is shifting, and in

fact as today – yesterday and today they are actually moving to weaken the

protections and allow for potentially infected nurses to work and just

monitor themselves at work. This is a very dangerous situation and will

only result in the spread of the virus.


HAYES:  The “they” there, that federal officials, local officials.




HAYES:  You`re saying the CDC is contemplating loosens the restrictions on

front-line health care workers being able to report to work.




HAYES:  Really?


CASTILLO:  And instead of ramping up. This is the time that we can actually

contain, but we need the appropriate protective measures, which includes

testing, up front and early.


We know – as I said before, I mean, this nurse volunteered to be part of

the care team. Now we have to ensure that if we are – if we do suffer

exposure that all of those appropriate measures, including quarantine, but

also including testing is done, and is done early.


HAYES:  All right, Bonnie Castillo, executive director of National Nurses

United. Thank you very much.


CASTILLO:  Thank you.


HAYES:  Guess who just made millions of dollars, thanks to the policies he

personally pushed in the White House? Jared Kushner`s latest windfall





HAYES:  It`s clear that if Joe Biden is the nominee, Donald Trump and his

allies will resuscitate the central part of the president`s own scheme that

got him impeached, the plot to smear Biden and his son as corrupt. In fact,

the jurors in that impeachment trial, the Republican senators, are now

happily taking up the task to further the plot and really not even

pretending it has anything to do with anything other than politics.


Senator Ron Johnson, chairman of the Homeland Security Committee, wrote a

letter about subpoenaing a witness in a probe on the issue, get this, the

day after the South Carolina primary when Joe Biden`s chances were suddenly



Now Johnson has told reporters he`s likely to issue an internal report on

the investigation in one or two months, you know, just around when Biden

might be getting the nomination.


And Donald Trump himself just admitted last night he will bring up Biden

and his son on the trail.




TRUMP:  That will be a major issue in the campaign. I will bring that up

all the time, because I don`t see any way out. I don`t see any way out. For

them, I don`t see how they can answer those questions.




HAYES:  Meanwhile, in the astoundingly corrupt nepotism news, the top story

by a mile is this dispatch that Jared Kushner is selling his stake in a

company that benefited from the tax breaks that he personally pushed for.


As the AP reports, quote, “the $25 million minimum value of Kushner`s stake

at the end of last year is up sharply from three years ago when it was

valued at at least $5 million.”


Here to talk about that, Andrea Bernstein, the co-host of the Trump Inc.

podcast, author of “American Oligarchs:  he Kushners, the Trumps and the

Marriage of Money and Power.”


This headline caught my eye, and I still can`t quite believe it. So Kushner

was invested in a company called Cadre. What is that?


ANDREA BERNSTEIN, AUTHOR:  So, cadre is a company that was up by Jared

Kushner and Josh Kushner, his brother. It`s a sort of real estate tech

platform so you can invest virtually in real estate essentially.


HAYES:  And one of the things that you could do is make use through that

platform of these opportunity zones, right, which are tax credits for

certain areas.


BERNSTEIN:  Right. So the opportunity zones came about as a result of the

Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, which is something that Jared Kushner, and

especially Ivanka Trump, pushed in the Senate and it just squeaked past.

And what it enables companies to do, it enables people with capital to get

tax breaks for investing in poor areas of the country, but they`re so

broadly defined and what you can invest in is so broadly defined that

virtually anybody with capital can take advantage of this tax break.


HAYES:  And the tax break doesn`t seem to be particularly well targeted.

Like, I`ve seen lots of articles about essentially gaming these opportunity

zones, parking your money in places that don`t really need investment and

getting the benefits.


BERNSTEIN:  Right. I mean, we know in opportunity zones broadly that there

have been many cases where government officials have been pushed to include

wealthy people`s investments in them. We don`t know that with the Kushner

family, but we do know that there was this inherent conflict from the

beginning because Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump were pushing a tax break

that the Kushner family company, Kushner Real Estate, and also Cadre, this

tech company, could benefit from.


HAYES:  So there`s two conflicts, right. There`s the whole Kushner empire

is built on real estate.


BERNSTEIN:  Correct.


HAYES:  They`re pushing for a real estate tax break.


BERNSTEIN:  Correct.


HAYES:  That the Kushner family could benefit from.


BERNSTEIN:  Correct.


HAYES:  And then there`s a software platform that can also serve as a

platform for investors investing in using these tax breaks.


BERNSTEIN:  Correct. So cadre has all of the sort of Trump family conflicts

built into one. You might remember that Jared Kushner didn`t initially

disclose it. He didn`t initially…


HAYES:  He didn`t?


BERNSTEIN:  He did not. He didn`t initially divest from it. He and his wife

pushed a tax break that could benefit this company.


Now, we have no evidence that the company did specifically benefit from

their specific actions, but it shows the whole structural problem of the

senior advisor in the White House, an incredibly powerful person, profiting

from his family businesses and his business with his brother while also

serving in the White House.


HAYES:  Right. So he`s got this investment. He doesn`t disclose it. Later

he discloses it. The company he`s invested could theoretically benefit from

a policy he pushed, and now he`s divesting and banking it appears a 500

percent profit at the minimum?


BERNSTEIN:  We don`t – and we don`t know because of the lack of disclosure

to what extent this law helped this family because one of the things that`s

built in is that you get the benefit on your tax return, which as we know

is not public, so we don`t know how much of a benefit it`s going to

individual companies and taxpayers. And that`s one of the problems of the

whole opportunity zone is that there`s no transparency.


HAYES:  Wait, but, no, we know Jared Kushner sold his stake in cadre.


BERNSTEIN:  We do know he sold his stake.


HAYES:  And the value went up enormously in the last three years.


BERNSTEIN:  Right. We don`t know why. We don`t know whether if it was

because of this or because of something else.


HAYES:  It`s good timing. It`s good to be the king.


BERNSTEIN:  I mean, I want to be clear…


HAYES:  Yes, of course, no. I`m just saying we know that he had it, we know

he sold it. We know it went up in between and we know he was working at the

White House.


BERNSTEIN:  It`s the fundamental instability in Jared Kushner`s

relationship with his family business. There were people who have told me

that they were very clear with Jared Kushner and his father, Charlie

Kushner, that he needed to make a choice, White House or family business,

and that the family business was going to be put in this position of

everything was always going to be a question about whether it`s a conflict,

as it should be.


HAYES:  And here we are.


Andrea Bernstein, thank you so much for being here.


HAYES:  Coming up, as the last woman with a path to the presidency in 2020

drops out, we will assess the legacy of Elizabeth Warren`s candidacy, next.




HAYES:  Elizabeth Warren ran an incredible campaign in many ways. Her plans

and policies were just about the most developed of any candidate in recent

memory. And for a short while, that seemed to be working for her.


At the beginning of last October, Warren had ascended to being the front-

runner, topping national polls.


But what followed was a steep decline, ending with the senator not even

winning her home state of Massachusetts on Super Tuesday.


Today, following Warren`s announcement that she`s ending her campaign,

there is a palpable sense of grief among many of her supporters, and

frankly among a lot of American women, who just watched the last viable

female candidate in the race drop out, a race that started with a record-

setting six women running for president.


Earlier today outside her home in Cambridge, Mass, Elizabeth Warren talked

about her own feelings about the end of the road.




UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE:  I wonder what your message would be to the women and

girls who feel like we`re left with two white men to decide between.


SEN. ELIZABETH WARREN (D-MA):  I know. One of the hardest parts of this is

all those pinkie promises and all those little girls who are going to have

to wait four more years. That`s going to be hard.


Gender in this race, you know that is the trap question for every woman. If

you say, yeah, there was sexism in this race, everyone says whiner. And if

you say, no, no, there was no sexism, about a bazillion women think, what

planet do you live on?




HAYES:  All right. We`re going to talk about the legacy of Warren`s

campaign and why it ended the way it did when we come back. Don`t go away.






WARREN:  Corruption has put our planet at risk. Corruption has broken our

economy, and corruption is breaking our democracy. I know what`s broken.

I`ve got a plan to fix it. And that`s why I`m running for president of the

United States.




HAYES:  20,000 people showed up in New York last September to hear

Elizabeth Warren make her case for the presidency. She was drawing enormous

crowds back then. And last fall was kind of the peak of her campaign in the



So what happened? To talk about why the Warren campaign ended the way it

did today, I`m joined by Alicia Garza, co-creator of the Black Lives Matter

movement, and Jelani Cobb, staff writer for The New Yorker.


Alicia, let me start with you as someone who was a supporter and surrogate

of the Warren campaign. I know today is a very difficult day. How do you

understand what happened in this campaign?



happened in this campaign is that a very talented, capable, intelligent,

woman was denied her shot at being the nominee of the Democratic Party.


HAYES:  Denied by what?


GARZA:  Well, I think a number of different things. One, obviously, we`ve

been talking about misogyny and patriarchy all day and we can`t deny the

role that gender played in this campaign. But I also think something that`s

really important is that there was really a sense that there were risks to

take that people weren`t willing to do.


And even though a lot of people thought she was the better candidate, they

weren`t willing to take a risk in relationship to what it might mean to

defeat Donald Trump in 2020, and that`s really fundamentally a shame.


HAYES:  Yeah, if you ask me, as someone sort of observed this and reported

on it, to identify the one thing, particularly that inflection point, it

was these fears about her electability.


And particularly this, and I want to give due credit to people that had

these fears, they basically thought this exceedingly smart – I mean,

undeniably brilliant, like, Howitzer of a mind woman, right, extremely

educated and a live wire, right, that this woman, this professional,

brilliant woman, is going to intimidate a certain slice of male voters who

will not vote for her because of essentially sexist inclinations and then

because those people exist then we shouldn`t nominate her. That was

basically the argument, right?




I mean, so, I mean, what we`ve had is this kind of dueling cynicisms.


HAYES:  Yes.


COBB:  You know, where people are saying, especially even with the kind of

– one of the obstacles that Bernie Sanders ran into, particularly in the

south among African-American voters, was a very cynical expectation of what

white people were willing to do.


It was like I think white people may be willing to vote for Joe Biden, I

don`t think they`d be willing to vote for Bernie Sanders.


People were making a similar kind of calculation around gender with

Elizabeth Warren. Back in 2008, people made the same kind of calculation

around Barack Obama. And he was able to kind of dodge the raindrops to

prove himself in ways that people were going, oh, well maybe, perhaps, I`ll

give this a shot.


But it creates a burden, like, people say that kind of nothing succeeds

like success, nothing fails like failure, either. And so the ideas that you

only get one shot for any group, any person, that`s from a group that

hasn`t historically been represented in this way, and it compounded in a

way for Elizabeth Warren that is really somewhere between heartbreaking and

outrageous to see.


GARZA:  Can I just say, too, though, that I think progressives missed a

really big shot this time around, and in that what I mean is there`s an

opportunity to have a progressive candidate as the nominee, and one of the

things that we did here was we actually started to split hairs in a way

that I think kind of pushed her out of consideration.


If we had gone into this moment saying the ultimate goal here is to get

somebody who is going to move forward an agenda that makes sense for our

families and for us, and we`re going to back whoever it is that shares that

vision, I think we would have seen a very different outcome tonight.


HAYES:  But to offer a criticism of the campaign, itself, or at least the

message, it struck me sometimes that the message was extremely well honed

for professional liberals, educated folks, across all sort of different

groups, right? So, like, cis/trans, gay/straight, black, white, Latino,

disability community, but it was a very heady, wonky, kind of literate

message, if I can say so. And was there sort of a failure to broaden out

that message?


GARZA:  Well, I think that there was a failure in terms of connecting her

message and the message that Sanders was putting forward.


HAYES:  Yeah.


GARZA:  Because, again, splitting hairs wasn`t the move.


And when we look at it, the real conversation should have been both/and so

we can get to this rather than either/or. And I think a lot of people just

got spun around in that, frankly.


I`m not sure that I buy that she only appealed to professionals or

intellectuals. I think that a capable woman who has plans for every issue

that you could possibly imagine, how to solve those problems, is also seen

as threatening, but I also feel like the way voters engage with elections

in this country, quite frankly, most voters, is we`ve been taught to engage

around personality and not policy or plan.


COBB:  Which is another interesting point here, because when you`re talking

about the kind of wonkiness and cerebral approach she has and you know you

understand it has a particular appeal, the other part of it is that she is

exceedingly plain spoken.


HAYES:  Yes. Extremely good communicator.


COBB:  Extremely good communicator and she is – she has a kind of almost

stereotypical Midwestern charm.


HAYES:  Yes, I agree.


COBB:  If she were a man, we`d say it was like Jimmy Stewart.


HAYES:  Folksy.


COBB:  Folksy, right. And one of the things I noticed on a personal

interaction with her is I was an Amtrak, this was about two years ago, and

I found myself seated in front of her. We got into a long conversation. And

she`s a professor. And she did this thing of again and again and again at

points where we disagreed, she would point out – she would point out what

she appreciated in my point before moving on to her critique. And I thought

that that was such a valuable way to communicate.


HAYES:  Alicia Garza and Jelani Cobb, thank you for joining us tonight.


That is All In for this evening. It turns The Rachel Maddow Show starts

right now with a big interview, Elizabeth Warren, who will be joining

Rachel momentarily. Good evening, Rachel.









Copyright 2020 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