House Democrat calls for emergency hearing. TRANSCRIPT: 12/6/18, Hardball w/ Chris Matthews
CHRIS MATTHEWS, MSNBC HOST: No defense. Let`s play HARDBALL.
Good evening. I`m Chris Matthews in Washington.
With a special counsel`s probe looming over his presidency, Donald Trump
today resumed his attacks on the investigation after a brief two-day
hiatus. Resorting to his usual talking points, Trump made the unfounded
claim on twitter that without the phony Russia witch hunt, my approval
rating would be at 75 percent. It`s call Presidential harassment, he said.
Now we are learning that Trump`s impulsive twitter habit may be his own
line of defense against the reckoning that may soon come. That`s because
“the Atlantic” is today reporting that there is no strategy for how to deal
with the upcoming revelations from special counsel`s office. In fact, the
Trump White House is all but winging it.
Quote “according to a half dozen current and former White House officials,
the administration has no plans in place for responding to the special
counsel`s findings say for expecting a twitter spree.”
Remember Giuliani`s claim last August that he was drafting a counter report
to discredit the results of the investigation? Giuliani now says he hasn`t
drafted anything. Well, according to “the Atlantic,” Giuliani said it`s
been difficult in the past few months to even consider drafting response
plans or devote time to the counter report.
White House sources also say they recognize the quote “if you tilt of
drafting a strategy that Trump will likely ignore anyway,” closed quote.
Well, part of the problem according to one former Trump official is that
any attempt to plan ahead quote “would mean you would have to have an
honest conversation about what might be coming.”
Well, some potential revolutions could come from Mueller`s office as early
as tomorrow. That`s because we are expecting sentencing memos to be file
on the case of this is a big one, Michael Cohen who is actively cooperating
with the special counsel and Paul Manafort who is has broken his plea
agreement by lying to investigators. It means that we could learn about
the information each witness has given to or withheld from Mueller`s
prosecutions. That`s tomorrow.
Joining me right now is Democratic congressman Eric Swalwell who sits on
the House intelligence committee. Heidi Przybyla, national political
reporter for NBC News and Chuck Rosenberg is a former U.S. attorney and
former senior FBI official. Thank you all.
I will go to congressman Swalwell about this thing now. What do you make
of the Trump team, according to reporting by “the Atlantic,” they don`t
have a defense? Rudy Giuliani was BSing weeks ago when he said we are
putting together a big counter reporter. We are going to come out with a
report to match Mueller`s report. Now they are saying we don`t have
nothing. We are going to play shortstop on this. Just see which way the
REP. ERIC SWALWELL (D-CA), INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE: Good evening, Chris.
How do you prepare somebody who is a stranger to the truth for what`s about
to come? Of course there is no way to defend him. He will take his own
course. He will continue to obstruct, tamper and try to influence the
But here`s where his staff should be prepared because the President calls
it presidential harassment, by it`s really just the end of the presidential
immunity that he has enjoyed. So there are going to be subpoenas coming
his way to the White House, to the Trump organization. There is going to
be a call for witnesses who came in and gave us a bunch of BS stories to
actually be straight with us or be held in contempt of Congress. And
there`s going to be an effort to want to know if the White House is willing
to finally come clean about what happened.
So this isn`t going away. They can`t just wish this away. The American
people gave us 40 new members of Congress to put a balance of power on all
of these abuses of power.
MATTHEWS: What do you make – just to make that point of your last one,
give you a chance to make it? We have had Mueller going at this guy for a
long time now. Mueller`s, I call him the iceberg because you don`t know
what he has got but he is going to hit hard when he hits and the “titanic”
could well sink as it did in history.
But here is the question. How does Congress make this stronger assault on
Trump`s definition of the truth or his lack of dealing with the truth? Why
is Congress jumping on here matter? Help me.
SWALWELL: Because we have a Presidential election in 2020 and we were
attacked in the last one. And if we can`t weather another attack like we
had in 2016, a democracy can`t survive. So if we are going to harden the
ballot box and make sure the American people have the awareness they need,
we have to know just who the President`s team worked with in the past, how
the Russians pulled this off and then put reforms in place so that it
doesn`t happen again.
We are now much better able to do that. But that means taking an MRI to
everything the Trump team did with the Russians and perhaps also the
Saudis. It looks like they were open for business with anyone that wanted
to help them.
But it`s our democracy that`s at stake. This isn`t about one person, it`s
about whether the rule of law and free and fair elections will still
persist in our country.
MATTHEWS: Heidi, two related questions. Does Trump know what`s coming
from Mueller? And secondly, has he prepared his team of lawyers to defend
HEIDI PRYZBYLA, NBC NEWS NATIONAL POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: He may have some
sense of it because according to that –
MATTHEWS: He knows with Don.
PRYZBYLA: According to Giuliani himself, it took three weeks for the
President to answer a series of questions that should have taken two days.
Part of the problem that he is facing also is simply a staffing issue.
First of all, his chief counsel on this has been held up by some kind of a
security clearance problem after Don McGahn left.
And secondly, think about it from the staff`s perspective, Chris. Either
you are a staff member who yourself may have legal exposure or you are a
staff member who doesn`t want to have that legal exposure. And so he is
not - he is surrounded by people who aren`t talking straight to him as well
and people who believe even if they do, he`s not going to listen to them
anyway. He is going to ignore them, do his own thing on twitter.
MATTHEWS: Anyway, as Heidi mentioned, Rudy Giuliani also suggested the
President had some difficulty answering those written questions posed by
Mueller`s team. As Giuliani told “the Atlantic,” answering those questions
was a nightmare. It took him about three weeks to do what normally would
have taken two days. Wow. This comes a month after the President made a
point of saying he personally answered the questions very easily. Let`s
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: My lawyers aren`t working on
that, I`m work on that. I write the answers. My lawyers don`t write
answers, I write answers. I was asked a series of questions. I have
answered them very easily. Very easily.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MATTHEWS: Chuck, when does self-delusion hit the floor?
CHUCK ROSENBERG, FORMER U.S. ATTORNEY: Well, fair question. You know,
Heidi made this point and congressman made this point, the President seems
to have some trouble with the truth. What any good lawyer needs to be –
an effective good lawyer, is a complete unvarnished truth from their
client. Without that it`s going to be very hard to push back on anything
that prosecutors do or on any report that is written.
MATTHEWS: What comes first, the chicken or the egg? Somebody who is
really guilty of a murder, for example, they don`t run in and tell their
lawyer, I did it. So I`m told.
ROSENBERG: Well –
MATTHEWS: So does Trump – he doesn`t tell everybody I was working with
the Russians or I obstructed justice. He is not going to tell that to a
lawyer, is he? Is that illegal what I did? I mean, is he actually going
to have that conversation?
ROSENBERG: Well, should he have that conversation? Absolutely. Will he,
in my experience, Chris, as a prosecutor, defense attorneys, as very good
defense attorneys often learn more about what their client did from me, the
prosecutor, than their own client and that`s unfortunate.
ROSENBERG: Because no matter what it is you did, if you want someone to
mitigate it for you, right, if you want someone to make a bad situation as
good as you possibly can, you have to tell them the truth.
MATTHEWS: But the criminals tell their lawyers they did it?
ROSENBERG: Some do. Most don`t.
Anyway, “the Atlantic” also reports that according to congressional sources
there`s been little communication between the White House and the
President`s Republican allies in Congress. According to a senior
Republican aide, we haven`t heard from the White House at all on this. You
think there would be more of an effort to have a coordinated response.
Members want to help but can`t if they are not getting information.
Congressman, I know you are on the other side of the aisle. But do you get
the sense that Republicans are out there working hand in glove with the
President (INAUDIBLE)? I ask that because 89 percent of Republican voters
are still with this Republican President. So I wonder whether the
Republican members are with them or not.
SWALWELL: I`m afraid to see what Republican colleagues of mine would do if
they did have a line of communication because what I see underground in the
House intelligence committee and above ground in the House Judiciary
Committee is an effort at almost every stop to protect the President.
SWALWELL: At many points it`s actually obstructing. So I have a hard time
believing that`s true. We have had witnesses come in before the House
intelligence committee who were feeding back – their lawyers told us they
were feeding back their questions to the White House. It seems like they
are well-aligned. So I don`t necessarily buy that.
MATTHEWS: So Mr. Nunes, the chairman of your committee, I`m told January
3rd it`s typical.
SWALWELL: Yes. And he had a line of communication to the President before
the campaign. And we saw that it – all throughout the investigation they
sought to protect him.
And here`s a classic example. I think the public should know this more.
Every single one of the interviews we did, the dozens of people we
interviewed with respect to Russia, all of their transcripts are protected
from going to Mueller. We think there are a lot of lies that were told and
Devin Nunes has stop this every time we have tried to send those
transcripts to Mueller. That I think is doing the President`s bidding and
protecting those people from criminal exposure.
MATTHEWS: What a protection act.
Anyway, as I mentioned, sentencing memos will be filed tomorrow, Friday,
detailing the cooperation that Michael Cohen has provided to investigators
as well Paul Manafort`s crimes and lies that cost him his plea deal and
probably his liberty.
However, legal experts tell NBC News that it`s likely that both documents
will contain sections that are blacked out, as was the case with the
sentencing memo Mueller filed Tuesday in the case of Michael Flynn.
Chuck, tell me, a lot of us were depressed by a lot of that black covering
up of a lot of this interesting stuff. What we did know is it looks like
General Flynn`s going to get off. Cohen, will he get a couple of years and
Manafort will get the rest of his life? What kind of a message do you
think we are going to get tomorrow in the filing?
ROSENBERG: Manafort is going to be at the higher end of bad and Cohen is
going to be at the lower end of bad. There`s no question. But there is a
really simple formulation for what you should expect tomorrow. If it`s
public, it`s not going to be sensitive. If it`s sensitive, it`s not going
to be public. People should not be surprised that prosecutors and agents
keep out of the public record details about ongoing investigations. It`s
precisely what we saw with Flynn.
PRYZBYLA: So if there are a lot of redactions, you think that`s bad for
ROSENBERG: If there are a lot of redactions, it`s bad for somebody, it
might be the President, but it`s absolutely bad for somebody. I mean,
where the speculation comes in is trying to read redactions.
MATTHEWS: The beauty from looking at it, I am not a lawyer, which I often
like to remind everybody. I look at it common sense wise. It seems like
you have got one guy, his lawyer fixer, who every time he got in trouble
with a woman or a scandal, he calls up Michael Cohen. He is the guy he
calls in the middle of the night. OK. Then he got the general who is
going to be his chief foreign affairs guy. He is going to be the head of
national security for him. It seems to between the two of them, between
the two of them, the guy who handles the hotel and the Miss America or Miss
Universe, all that stuff and the other guy who handles the big picture, the
macro stuff. You are going to find out if there was collusion because one
of these two guys will know about it. And that`s going to be in these
findings, I think, especially coming from Cohen, who did - who is
apparently coming clean.
PRYZBYLA: Not only collusion but whether Mueller`s investigation extends
well beyond Russia and collusion and into the tentacles of the Trump
organization because that was – remember, when Trump really started his
freak out was when there was a raid of Cohen`s offices because that is the
treasure trove in where all the secrets are for how the Trump organization
operates. And as we are seeing, and the congressman mentioned earlier, you
know, whether it`s the Saudis or the Russians, there is a lot of inter-
connective tissue there when it comes to his financial dealings. Michael
Cohen has the lock and key to a lot of that.
MATTHEWS: Let`s talk about that with the congressman. Congressman
Swalwell. Go ahead. My big question is if you`re sitting down with some
sodium pentathlon, some truth serum and you have Michael Cohen trying to
save his keister (ph) from prison. What would you go after?
SWALWELL: Well, one, what was the President`s knowledge of the Trump tower
deal that was being set up at the end of 2015 and now it looks like all the
way to the middle of 2016, even after he was the nominee. Two, did the
President know about the Trump tower meeting where the Russians offered
dirt on Hillary Clinton? Three, did the President know about the WikiLeaks
dumps that were coming?
Michael Cohen, the reason he is so relevant, he`s one of the only
individuals who lived in all three of Trump`s worlds, his personal world,
his private – his personal and private world, his campaign world and his
financial world at the Trump organization. So I hope the American people
get that moment as we saw in Watergate where Michael Cohen sits down,
raises his right hand and gives a full allocution and comes about what
MATTHEWS: Well said. That was a great rant, too, congressman.
Thank you so much, congressman Eric Swalwell of California, Heidi Pryzbyla
and Chuck Rosenberg.
Coming up, we have got the latest of the North Carolina vote theft
investigation. Could a new election be called in that House race? That`s
a rarity but I don`t see how they can say this was a fair one.
Plus, risky business. “The Washington Post” has reported a Saudi-funded
lobbyist paid for 500 rooms in Trump`s hotel after the 2016 election.
That`s a lot of rooms at 700 bucks a bite.
And the HARDBALL roundtable weighs in on Trump`s boasted, without the
Mueller probe his approval rating would be, well, 75 percent. And Trump
reportedly said he is not worried about the skyrocketing debt because he
thinks – well, he thinks when that comes it will be trouble but he won`t
be around to shoulder the blame. Isn`t that what he says with climate,
too, I won`t be here for the pain?
Finally, let me finish with this week`s pictures of a country capable of
not just of civility as we saw this week but an actually true nobility.
This is HARDBALL, where the action is.
MATTHEWS: Welcome back to HARDBALL.
On the night of November 6th this year, voters across the country send a
resounding message of disapproval to the Republicans. Let`s face it,
according to NBC, the latest numbers have Democrats gaining 40 seats in the
House of Representatives, 40.
Having suffered losses nationwide, some Republicans, however, are out to
subvert the message. Watch them. Republican legislatures in Wisconsin and
Michigan in a move that seems to usurp the will of the voters are motiving
ahead with legislation to knee cap incoming Democrats elected to statewide
offices like attorneys general and governors.
Well, this comes as new details of what looks like vote stealing continued
to emerge down in South Carolina. The state`s board of elections has
launched an investigation in the Tar Heel state into irregularities with
absentee ballot in the ninth congressional district with a particular focus
on Robeson County. Investigators have followed up with witnesses who link
one individual, Mcrae Dowless, to a seemingly larger effort to collect
absentee ballots. He was hired as a contractor to work on absentee ballot
outreach for Republican candidate, Congressman Mark Harris.
Earlier today we learned that the Democratic challenger there Dan McCready
has rescinded his concession speech. Documents posted on the election
board website show that Dowless turned in nearly 600 applications for
absentee ballots. You are only supposed to ally for your own.
According to news reports, the election board has also issued subpoenas
issued for Harris` campaign, the firm that hired Dowless as well as a
candidate for sheriff in the same election who also hired Dowless. Well,
if the board determines that it has found evidence of irregularities that
may have tainted the results, they can call a new election down there.
Didn`t know you can do that.
For more on, I`m joined by Leigh Ann Caldwell, NBC News political reporter
is down there in North Carolina. Zerlina Maxwell, director of progressive
programming in Sirius XM and John Braveman (ph), Republican strategist.
Leigh Ann, tell us about how it looks down there overall for this vote
LEIGH ANN CALDWELL, NBC NEWS POLITICAL REPORTER: Yes. Sure, Chris. So
I`m in Robeson County, and Robeson and Blatant County which is adjacent,
really ground zero for this alleged voter fraud or election fraud that`s
been taking place. And it has to do with absentee ballots.
We have spoken with voters who said that random unknown people came to
their doors and said that they would collect their absentee ballots and
then mail them in for them, even saying you don`t have to fill it out, I`ll
fill it out for you or, here, I have some stamps, I`ll mail your ballot for
And so what the state election board is looking into is how rampant and how
widespread this is. They have held two closed-door hearings that tell them
that there is enough there that they are not going to certify this race.
They must hold an evidentiary hearing with all the evidence that they found
in their investigation by December 21st. And they have a couple of options
there. They can certify the race. They can hold a new election or they
can continue to investigate.
And we`re going to have to wait for them to make that decision until that
MATTHEWS: And, John, it seems to me two questions here, elections and
You can say that the guy Harris won by enough votes, you`re going to let it
go, because he won by more than they can have evidence of cheating. But
you also have to put away the person who did it, I think.
Somebody`s out there getting people, unsuspecting people, older-age people,
mailing them absentee bottoms they never even asked for and then showing up
when they knew they`re going arrive at their post – in their house, and
say, can I have your absentee ballot, which I know you have got? Because
I`m going to fill it out.
JOHN BRABENDER, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST: Well, no, and that`s fair. Let`s
not forget, too, the Republican in the primary also had concerns about
MATTHEWS: About this kind of stuff.
Now, look, we mentioned Michigan and Wisconsin, where Republicans are
gaming the system. This is potentially fraud, which all of us should agree
MATTHEWS: I hate people that cheat.
BRABENDER: And, frankly, in this profession that I`m in, it`s outrageous
to me that – you can play hardball. That doesn`t mean you cheat.
MATTHEWS: I`m with you.
BRABENDER: And if you cheat, there should be consequences, both to the
person who is responsible, and, frankly, if there is cheating that went on
in this, they should redo the election.
MATTHEWS: Zerlina, you`re talking about people who are unsuspecting. Not
everybody knows all the rules. If somebody comes by and acts official,
they seem like an important person, they have that sort of manner about
them, it`s, I`m here from the election bureau. I want to help you get your
ballot in, which, by the way, you didn`t even know you were going to get
until we phoned in, we mailed in for it.
That`s the scary part, is completely taking the vote away from the person.
ZERLINA MAXWELL, SIRIUSXM RADIO: Right.
It`s going completely against the will of the American people, when you`re
not allowing them to fairly cast their ballots and to make their voices
heard. And so you`re basically subverting democracy. And the great irony
is, is that Republicans are the ones always talking about potential voter
But when we actually have a case of real potential voter fraud, it`s the
Republicans doing it.
MAXWELL: And I agree with John.
MAXWELL: I agree with the Republican on the panel that we should make sure
that elections are fair and every vote is counted.
MATTHEWS: Are you saying Republicans are more likely to cheat in elections
than Democrats? You`re smiling.
Are you – you`re smiling. OK, I thought I heard that.
MAXWELL: No, what I`m saying is that, in this case, the Republicans are
talking about fraud, but they`re the ones actually doing it.
MATTHEWS: I grew up in a big city, OK? OK? I`m sorry. It`s been done
before on the other side, too.
MAXWELL: Sure, of course, Chris. But I`m talking about in recent years.
MATTHEWS: Of course. OK. Fair enough.
Anyway, the executive director of the North Carolina GOP said he would
support a new election only if fraudulent activity could be proven and
shown to have changed the outcome of the November election. Let`s listen
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DALLAS WOODHOUSE, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, NORTH CAROLINA REPUBLICAN PARTY: We
need to have a public airing of the facts very soon by the Board Of
If they can determine that there was wrongdoing and that those people
should be criminally prosecuted under state and federal law, which we fully
support, but that numerically it could not have changed the outcome of the
race, then Mr. Harris needs to be certified.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MATTHEWS: Well, earlier today, “The Washington Post” reported that both
his party, that`s the Republicans, and a regional political director for
the national Republican Congressional Committee were warned of voting
irregularities in the county during the primaries, as John mentioned.
The NRCC denies those claims. However, former Republican Governor Pat
McCrory said that he too raised concerns about Bladen County during his
reelection campaign two years ago.
Let me get back to Leigh Ann.
It seems to me the question is, if there is taint here, if there was
cheating, criminality, should the election count, even if the numbers don`t
add up to the difference between the winner and the loser in the first
CALDWELL: Yes, it`s interesting what Dallas Woodhouse said. He said that
he would support a new election if there is enough evidence that would
change the outcome.
All he`s stating is the law. That`s what North Carolina law says and
that`s what the Board of Elections would have to do if it would change the
outcome of the election. You know, I talked to him just before we went on
air about that “Washington Post” story and how they`re saying that
Pittenger, who is the Republican who ran against Harris in the primary,
made these concerns to him and the party after the primary and said, look,
there was something shady going on in Bladen County and Robeson county as
And Woodhouse said he didn`t remember. He couldn`t confirm or deny. It`s
not something he recalled, but he said it`s very likely that they did say
something, it just didn`t register at the time.
And now they`re trying to really distance themselves from it and say what -
- say what`s happening here is sickening and horrifying. But they`re also
protecting their candidate, Mark Harris. Woodhouse told me as well that
Mark Harris had nothing to do with this and he is an innocent victim.
That`s still a very open question, especially since a consulting firm that
Mark Harris hired is the one that hired Dowless, who was running this
absentee ballot operation, Chris.
MATTHEWS: Is it your sense working in politics that a candidate wouldn`t
know that he had a real dangerous crook out there, somebody out who was
basically manipulating the numbers?
BRABENDER: No, absolutely that is possible. And absolutely it`s possible
that the firm that hired them did not know this individual was going to do
that. There`s a lot of bad people.
BRABENDER: You don`t need a license, pass a test or anything in this
MATTHEWS: OK. What is your moral judgment about it?
Are you still responsible for something done on your behalf by your money,
with your money?
BRABENDER: Well, it depends what you mean by responsible. Sure, you
should scrutinize this.
MATTHEWS: This guy was getting $40,000 to win on absentee ballots. He was
told, win. He was told to win.
BRABENDER: I understand that.
But there is the presumption in a campaign that you are hiring
professionals who are going to do this following the law. So, that is not
impossible. In fairness, there are a lot of rogue consultants out there
that think this is the right way to win a race.
And if the people hired them knew they were doing it…
MATTHEWS: Zerlina, here is your turn.
Do you think the Republicans should join in the condemnation of what
MAXWELL: Absolutely, certainly, because it potentially impacted the
So, Republican voters have even not been able to have their votes fairly
cast and their voices heard. So I think this is an issue that goes to the
heart of our democracy. It`s not just about this one election, but it`s
also about the voters having faith that their votes are going to be
accurately counted by those election officials.
And so we don`t need this political gamesmanship. If we want to make
access available to everyone, we should make voting easier, we should
expand early voting, and we should make voter registration as easy as
possible, so that more people can vote, because, you know, it`s really a
competition of ideas.
And if Republicans were confident in those, they wouldn`t be doing the
cheating and the election rigging.
MATTHEWS: I agree.
You know, I do think that we have to not only make sure nobody cheats, we
have to make sure nobody thinks people are cheating. And we have got to
get that out of our system. There shouldn`t be that nonsensical charges
that are not fair.
You`re right about that, Zerlina. All this stuff about vote cheating, it`s
totally out of hand. It depresses the people`s confidence in the system.
And we need confidence in our electoral system.
Thank you, Leigh Ann Caldwell, for the great reporting, Zerlina Maxwell, as
always, John Brabender, of course.
Up next: Why was the Saudi government paying big bucks to put up groups of
U.S. veterans at Trump`s hotel right here in Washington? There you see a
picture of it. Were these vets being used to advance the interests of a
foreign government, the Saudi government, or deliver business to Trump, or
both? What do you think?
This is HARDBALL, where the action is.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. JOHN KENNEDY (R), LOUISIANA: I believe Prince Mohammed did know what
was going on. Somebody gave the order, and either he gave it or watched it
being given to gut Mr. Khashoggi like a fish.
SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R), SOUTH CAROLINA: If you want to buy our weapons
and integrate your economy into ours, there is a certain price to be paid.
Don`t chop somebody up in a consulate. That`s not too much to ask.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MATTHEWS: Wow. Those are outspoken Republicans.
Welcome back to HARDBALL.
That was Senator John Kennedy of Louisiana and, of course, Lindsey Graham,
both Republicans, making the case against Saudi Arabia in the murder of
journalist Jamal Khashoggi.
Graham is one of the co-authors of a bipartisan Senate resolution
introduced yesterday calling Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin S. – or bin
Salman, MBS, complicit – actually, that`s being nice – I think he ordered
it – Khashoggi`s murder.
President Trump has apparently dismissed charges of MBS` role in
Khashoggi`s death, but a new report has once again raised questions about
Trump`s vocal defense of the Saudi government and his own financial
entanglements with that regime.
According to “The Washington Post,” Saudi-backed lobbyists paid for 500
rooms at the president`s hotel here in Washington just three months after
the 2016 election. And the report notes that lobbyists spent more than
$270,000 to house six groups of visiting U.S. veterans at the Trump Hotel,
which Trump still owns.
The lobbyists who ran the trip say they chose Trump`s hotel strictly
because it offered a discount from that rate and had rooms available, not
to curry favor with the president.
I`m joined right now by Washington state Democratic Congressman Denny Heck,
who sits on the House Intelligence Committee.
What`s the smell of this sound like – seem like to you?
MATTHEWS: That`s a lot of money. It`s about $300,000.
REP. DENNY HECK (D), WASHINGTON: Well, the smell of that is the kind half
wants you to grab your nostrils by your thumb and your index finger and
Look, this is potentially the violation of who knows how many conflict of
interest statutes. It certainly raises the issue again of the Emoluments
Clause of the Constitution.
Just to remind your viewers, Chris, there are three mentions of the
Emoluments Clause in the Constitution, one in Article I, two in article II,
which require the president to report to Congress, submit to Congress any
gift or receipt of gift from a foreign government, which he`s absolutely
refused to do.
And, of course, that`s no surprise. He refuses to release his tax returns.
He`s the most – the least transparent, the most opaque president in
MATTHEWS: And, by the way, presidents, even when they get a gift, like
they get a horse or a pony or they get a vase or anything or a ring from a
foreign government, they immediately have to look at it, appreciate it, and
then give it to the National Archives. They can`t take anything,
HECK: So, let us remind viewers this is not only in the Constitution, but
it`s also what all modern presidents have done.
HECK: President Kennedy refused in part to accept honorary citizenship in
his ancestral homeland in Ireland because of this.
President Carter actually was required to sell his family peanut farm that
had been in the family I don`t know how many generations because of this.
All other presidents respect this, except this one.
MATTHEWS: Do you get a sense the Saudis are buying our president?
HECK: Buying, as in now or…
MATTHEWS: Buying, like putting a hotel…
HECK: Buying or bought?
MATTHEWS: Your tense is up to you.
HECK: Well, listen…
MATTHEWS: Do you think they`re – they`re putting – they`re buying hotel
rooms at his hotel to curry favor with our president?
HECK: If they weren`t, why isn`t he revealing it? Why isn`t he submitting
it to Congress? Why isn`t he being more transparent?
What has he got to hide?
MATTHEWS: Well, I would like to know the whole thing about the guy,
because I can`t figure this president out in this regard.
Originally, I gave him the benefit of the doubt. I thought what he was
trying to do was develop some big grand scheme, a grand deal with the
Saudis, who knows what, something to do with the terrorists, something to
do with Iran, something to do with Israel, that was going to be good for
And, lately, I get the feeling of a lot more petty reason.
HECK: Yes, it`s long past time for us to reevaluate our relationship with
Saudi Arabia. That`s for sure.
Listen, if they want to be a member of the community of civilized nations,
they have to begin acting like it. And ordering the murder of a journalist
certainly doesn`t qualify.
MATTHEWS: How sound is that? OK, you`re on the committee. How sound is
the CIA case that MBS, the prince, ordered this killing?
HECK: Obviously, Chris, I can`t reveal what it is that we have been
briefed on that is of a classified nature.
But I sit here before you tonight and tell you that I agree with Senator
Corker, who said, if this was in front of a court of law, this guy would be
convicted within 30 minutes.
MATTHEWS: Mike Pompeo is backing up the president. Why?
HECK: Who knows? Who knows?
MATTHEWS: Why – Mattis, the secretary of defense, is backing – they`re
all together on this.
HECK: No, they`re not. Chris, they`re not.
Why is it that our classified briefing for all members of the House next
week includes Secretary of State Pompeo, Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis,
but not the director of the CIA, Gina Haspel? Why is that?
MATTHEWS: Because she knows the truth.
HECK: All right. There you go.
MATTHEWS: Well, thank you very much, U.S. Congressman Denny Heck of
Up next: The passing of President George Herbert Walker Bush puts the
current occupant of the White House in sharp contrast. Don`t you think?
As the former president was being laid to rest today, President Trump was
tweeting about his own popularity.
How do we make sense of this massive shift in the makeup and priorities of
the Republican Party? Don`t you think?
You`re watching HARDBALL.
MATTHEWS: Welcome back to HARDBALL.
Well, today, former president – the late President George Herbert Walker
Bush was laid to rest in his presidential library down in Texas, alongside
his wife Barbara and daughter Robin, who died at, I think, age 3.
The past six days have been filled with tributes to the life and character
of the 41st president.
Longtime friend and Bush`s Secretary of State James A. Baker spoke at the
service in Houston today.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JAMES BAKER, FORMER U.S. SECRETARY OF STATE: He used to say that one of
the things he liked best about me was that I would always tell him what I
thought, even when I knew he didn`t want to hear it. Then we will have a
spirited discussion about that issue.
But he had a very effective way of letting me know when the discussion was
He would look at me and say, Baker, if you`re so smart, why am I president
and you`re not?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CHRIS MATTHEWS, MSNBC HOST: Well, as family and friends were gathered in
Texas for his service, the 45th president was busy tweeting here in
Washington about his approval rating and how it would be higher if not for
the special counsel`s investigation writing: My approval rating would be at
75 percent rather than 50 percent just reported by Rasmussen.
Well, to note, by the way, NBC News has concerns with Rasmussen`s polling
technology. In the midterms, it showed Republicans, by the way, just for
keeping things honest, ahead in the generic congressional vote. Actually,
they did not win in this election in November.
Let`s bring in tonight`s HARDBALL roundtable. Anita Kumar, White House
correspondent for McClatchy Newspapers, Ashley Pratte, who`s a conservative
commentator at NBC Think, love that, contributor, and Peter Emerson who
worked in three Democratic administration.
Let me start with this. Anita, this question of how could there be a party
that looked up to George Herbert Walker Bush and today looks up almost 90
percent to Donald Trump? Same party?
ANITA KUMAR, WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, MCCLATCHY NEWSPAPER: Well, he`s
president of the United States. So where do we have to go? He`s
president. He`s going to be running for re-election. He`s what they have
And so I do think a lot of people support him as he goes around the
country. You do see people support him. You do see people that don`t like
his personality, his tweeting, all that, but many of his policies are
traditional Republican policies.
ASHLEY PRATTE, NBC THINK CONTRIBUTOR/CONSERVATIVE COMMENTATOR: I was a
Republican and I could not bring myself to vote for him in 2016 because of
what he says, how he acts –
MATTHEWS: Who did you vote for?
PRATTE: I ended up voting for Paul Ryan who has ended up being a complete
letdown as well.
MATTHEWS: I agree on that one, too.
PRATTE: So, I thought he would have been the future of the Republican
Party. But I think the point is over these last few days, we`ve seen
George H.W. Bush be eulogized, right? And two words come to mind,
selflessness and service, which I do not see from this president at all.
And I feel like with the passing of people like Senator John McCain and
George H.W. Bush, I think what we now see is that there is a problem among
leadership in the Republican Party that no longer exists and this is going
to be a problem moving forward because there is enough young people like
myself who do not believe in the future of the Republican Party anymore and
MATTHEWS: Peter, you and I have been friends for a long time. There was a
scene at the church yesterday, at the cathedral, which I`ll never forget.
You had to be two hours ahead for most people because of protocol and
safety. In walks the president. He walks all the way up the aisle and
takes off his overcoat like he`s Reggie Van Gleason or something and hands
it to some attendant.
You know, there`s something about the way he did it was so big shot.
Everyone else took their overcoats off when they were in the church or hang
it up somewhere. But he had to do it in front of everybody and he had like
throw it to this attendant. It was something, Haile Selassie –
PETER EMERSON, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: What else could he do? He was
entering a house that was totally opposed to him on every level, whether it
be on character, whether it be on selfless service, whether it be on
patriotism. This is a guy that had bone spurs that prevented him from
serving the country.
I think the point ultimately is people don`t have a place to go. Democrats
have not offered an alternative, number one. Number two, if you talk to
dairy farmers, pig farmers soybean farmers, they are being screwed by this
MATTHEWS: Aren`t they still for this president?
EMERSON: Right now, because they have nowhere else to do, you`d have to
ask them to give up the promises that they believe in with this president.
And we the Democratic Party have not given them an alternative.
MATTHEWS: Let`s talk about presidential politics because I`m already
thinking about 2020. I know you all are, too. CNBC`s reporting that
Democratic Congressman Beto O`Rourke of Texas team has been fielding calls
from senior operatives who worked on President Barack Obama`s campaign in
the pivotal states of Iowa and New Hampshire.
As speculation continues about a potential presidential run by Beto in
2020, one columnist at “The Washington Post” is already getting whether the
Democratic rising star, Beto O`Rourke, is far enough left for the party.
Elizabeth Bruenig writes: W still have time to pick a politician with a
bold, clear, distinctively progressive agenda, and an articulated vision
beyond something-better-than this, the literal translation of hope-change
Beto is a lot like Obama. True. It`s perhaps time for left-leaning
Democrats to realize that might not be a good thing.
Peter, I`m amazed by this. Here`s a guy that has electoral power. People
like him. He`s got charisma like the president. And he has somebody I
guess on the left saying he`s not left enough?
EMERSON: There is an amazing wonderful blue collar philosopher who once
said naivete in children is often charming, in adults, it`s stupid. That`s
For that person to write about antipathy towards Wall Street, oil and gas,
welfare reform, those are all major issues that we need a president to deal
with, not to simply scorn them and discard them. And second, I think
Beto`s in an incredible position, not necessarily about the presidency, but
he`s captured energy. And one of the failings of the Obama campaign in `08
was that after we won, we never had a call to service.
And I think Beto and his team are figuring out where do you take all that
MATTHEWS: Get people in the act.
Let me go to Ashley on this. It seems to me if the Democratic Party sets
as a standard, you must be Bernie, otherwise an avowed socialist. I`m not
MATTHEWS: If that`s the political goal line you`re setting up, this person
isn`t for so-called Medicare for everybody all life, if they`re not for
free tuition payback, if they`re not for all this social progress, if
they`re not for a big role for the government in the economy, then they`re
If that`s the standard, you`re going to knock out a lot of candidates.
PRATTE: Well, let`s look at this, though. The DNC itself was against
Bernie Sanders and they set parameters to make sure he would not get enough
support and not have the support he needed. Let`s go back to
superdelegates and all that.
So, I do think the establishment in the Democratic Party will not allow
someone too progressive to get back in.
MATTHEWS: I don`t know about that. What about the voters?
PRATTE: So, now, here`s the interesting piece –
MATTHEWS: Talk about winning a game, can you beat Trump?
PRATTE: You`ve got to get to the suburban, blue collar middle class
voters. And they need to start thinking about that Obama/Trump flip that
happened in 2016 that again flipped in 2018. If you do not focus on that,
which they`re moderate swing voters, I`m not going to vote for a
progressive. I would vote for a Joe Biden, not a Beto O`Rourke.
MATTHEWS: How do you get people in the industrial states who flipped for
Trump to senator and governor in Michigan, Minnesota, Pennsylvania, the
KUMAR: I know, I totally agree. It`s like he`s only talking about the
primary, which is one thing. Let`s move on to the general election.
MATTHEWS: You know what they used to say back in the `60s?
PRATTE: What`s that?
MATTHEWS: NDC. November doesn`t count. The hard-left would say as long
as we win the primaries, it doesn`t matter, George McGovern.
But that mentality is out there, Peter. It`s out there now. I just saw in
the paper today, that Beto O`Rourke is too much like Obama. That`s a
problem? He won.
EMERSON: It`s a problem if you are opposed to energy, character, ethical
and moral values. Standing up and almost beating an incumbent senator who
flipped, meaning took the worst of Trump`s insults –
EMERSON: And then embraced it and went to bed with it. So –
KUMAR: Clearly, some people don`t agree with here. A lot of people –
MATTHEWS: Ruth, our friend over there, somebody, Marcus or Fred Hyatt over
there, said, let`s stir things up in the Democratic Party.
Finally, it`s not just the volatility of the stock market that should have
Trump worried – have him worried now, there is also the growing national
debt. The Treasury Department estimated that the federal government could
add nearly $1 trillion in new debt this year. That would be 146 percent
jump from just last year in the highest amount of debt issued since 2010.
However, the president is reportedly not concerned about $121 trillion debt
right now. According to “The Daily Beast,” sources close to the president
say he has repeatedly shrugged it off implying he doesn`t have to worry
about the money owed to America`s creditors, currently about $21 trillion,
because he won`t be around to pay for it.
So what do you make of that?
PRATTE: Well, the best part about here is the hypocrisy and everything,
but this takes the cake because I thought at least a genuine platform of
the Republican Party was fiscal responsibility.
PRATTE: Paul Ryan says today, well, that deficit, man, she`s the one that
got away. What? You had a chance to do something.
MATTHEWS: Reagan used to say I met all my promises but the deficit.
PRATTE: You had a majority.
MATHEWS: Cheney said deficits don`t matter politically. What do you make
about the debt, Peter? And, by the way, he doesn`t care about the future
he`s basically saying, the sun, the climate.
EMERSON: This is a guy who racked up almost $1 billion in debt and got to
forgiven through manipulation and deceitful actions. So, consequently,
I`ve been on the Hill talking to Congress people and senators. The one
issue that could be bipartisan and really help America is infrastructure
but they can`t pay for it, because no one`s going to agree to more taxes on
gas or user fees and it would take it over the $1 trillion debt.
MATTHEWS: Well, let`s have a capital budget. We can do it.
Anyway, the roundtable is sticking with us. And up next, these three will
tell me something I don`t know. We got to rebuild this country.
You`re watching HARDBALL.
MATTHEWS: We`re back with the HARDBALL round table.
Anita, tell me something I don`t know.
KUMAR: My colleagues are reporting that there is now a bipartisan group of
lawmakers that want the Department of Justice inspector general to look
into President Trump`s Labor Secretary Alexander Acosta. Acosta, if you`ll
recall, he was federal prosecutor in Miami when he made this deal to let
this multimillionaire basically off the hook, almost.
KUMAR: Yes, Jeffrey Epstein.
MATTHEWS: That story keeps coming back.
KUMAR: So, it won`t be the end of it.
PRATTE: Yesterday, big news coming out of my home state of New Hampshire,
secretary of state, Bill Gardner, who`s been the longest serving secretary
of state in the entire country, he`s now in his 22nd term, he just got
reelected yesterday by the lawmakers there in a 209 to 205 vote. Very
close. But he has been setting, as the secretary of state, and has the
authority for the New Hampshire primary and has made sure it`s remained
first in the nation.
So go, New Hampshire, and –
MATTHEWS: By the way, Dershowitz is involved in that case. A lot of
PRATTE: Yes, that`s right.
EMERSON: A revolt against Senator Chuck Schumer, the minority leader in
the Senate, is looming because he`s going to allow Manchin, Mr. Coal, Mr.
Dirty Coal, to take the ranking Democratic member chair on the Energy and
Natural Resources Committee.
MATTHEWS: Is that number two?
EMERSON: That`s the number two.
With a climate assessment report and millions of people demanding that
Congress do something, this is getting several senators to reconsider their
support of Schumer, particularly with the 2020 elections and young people
demanding that climate adaptation is the bigger issue.
MATTHEWS: Do you think that Schumer agreed to back Manchin on this
EMERSON: He`s the only one who could change it, and he`s decided to let
MATTHEWS: Schumer`s got a lot of people to keep happy. Thank you, Peter.
Inside stuff here tonight.
Anita Kumar, Ashley Pratte, Peter Emerson.
When we return, let me finish tonight with pictures of a country capable
not just of civility but of through nobility. We`ve seen it lately.
You`re watching HARDBALL.
MATTHEWS: Let me finish tonight with this week`s fine pictures of a
country capable not just of civility, but of true nobility.
That train rolling from Houston to College Station today gave some Texans
the chance to pay their tributes to the first President Bush in a fine
American way. And just by showing up along the tracks, they were able to
create a portrait of affection and admiration for the ages.
We saw something like that yesterday when the recent presidents and their
spouses shared the front pew in the National Cathedral. I missed it
yesterday, but it included genuinely affable moment between Secretary
Hillary Clinton and my former boss, President Jimmy Carter. When I saw
that clip today, I was struck by that sparkling American moment of
Secretary Clinton totally enjoying his company.
In other countries, less democracies, leaders fear to lose elections for
the most basic reason that their successor will throw them in jail or get
rid of them entirely. It`s one reason so few of them accept the results of
an election, why they cheat in elections.
Well, this is where America is different. For example, one of the U.S.
presidents in that front pew was turned out of office after a single White
House term and didn`t look the worse for it. And the other, lying up
closer to the altar, led a life that showed defeat at the polls can do
nothing to diminish one`s honor, especially when they were embraced the way
George Herbert Walker Bush or what Bush was by the man who defeated him.
And that`s HARDBALL for now. Thanks for being with us.
“ALL IN WITH CHRIS HAYES” starts right now.
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY
Copy: Content and programming copyright 2018 MSNBC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
Copyright 2018 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