Interview with Bernie Sanders. TRANSCRIPT: 7/10/19, The Rachel Maddow Show.
CHRIS HAYES, MSNBC HOST: Yes.
DONNA EDWARDS (D-MD), FORMER CONGRESSWOMAN: But I do think this continues
to be a fight that gets played out within the caucus on these substantive
HAYES: I think so, too, particularly those bills. Donna Edwards and Matt
Fuller, thank you both.
That is ALL IN for this evening.
“THE RACHEL MADDOW SHOW” starts right now. Good evening, Rachel.
RACHEL MADDOW, MSNBC HOST: Good evening, Chris. Thanks, my friend. Much
And thanks to you at home for joining us. Happy to have you here.
Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont is here in studio for an interview. I`m
very excited to be talking with Senator Sanders. I saw him at the debate
in Miami and we haven`t had him here in studio for an interview in a long
time. I`m very excited he`s here. He`s going to be here in just a moment.
Also exciting today, the U.S. national soccer team that won the World Cup
this weekend was celebrated in truly perfect, raucous and over the top
fashion today with a ticker tape parade through downtown Manhattan. This
was just – just pure joy. The excitement and the enthusiasm, just the
glee in the city, particularly from lots of kids in the city, it was
absolutely palpable today. It was so great.
Whether or not you were in New York City and you were able to make it, or
whether you just might have seen these images today, the footage and the
coverage, it was such a nice national bright spot in the news. Just worth
letting it wash over you, right? Just worth pausing to let it just make
you happy for a moment. It was so great.
I think especially it feels great because the news has been so dark lately,
right? It`s nice to have something that is pure gleaming glee because the
news has been dark. I mean, even today, the weird news was dark.
Like this new reporting over the last 24 hours from the great David
Fahrenthold at “The Washington Post.” David Fahrenthold`s new reporting
for “The Post” provides all Americans today with basically formal front
page notice that among the ways this president and his family are
continuing to make money from their private businesses on the side during
his time in office is by doing this event with a Miami strip club.
And this is not like a historical thing that turned up. This is this week.
You can meet your caddy girl Friday, July 12th, that`s the day after
tomorrow. You can also RSVP for your caddy girl. I don`t exactly know
what that means, but in order to do it, you call one of these numbers or
you just show up at the strip club. That`s the strip club address.
But that event that starts on Friday at the strip club continues on
Saturday at the Trump National Doral. You can see, that`s their logo here.
And I believe also on this flyer for the event, I believe that is the Trump
family crest as well, although you shouldn`t hold me to it. I think it is.
Some of the other promotional materials like this one posted at
exoticdancer.com show that in addition to the base rate for getting the
caddy girl of your choice, again you can earth buy the girl outright or you
can bid for her at an auction. In addition to the base rate for your caddy
girl, you can also – see right here under the Trump family crest, you can
pay for a VIP upgrade, which is a combined package where you get three days
and two nights` stay with breakfast at the president`s hotel combined with
a half hour in the VIP room plus bottle service at the strip club with full
So, you get a special stripper package combined with a stay at the
Now, I mention, there are a few different ways you can give the president
your money here through this event. You can sort of do the buy it now plan
or you pre-reserve the nude dancer that you want and you get to pick her
out specifically. Or you can roll the dice, press your luck, and instead
go to the auction the night before the event, the live auction, where you
can`t just pick the girl you want and buy her, all of the girls that are
remaining will be sold off to the highest bidder one by one.
So, after you purchase your chosen nude dancer, either directly or at the
auction on Friday night, then on Saturday at the president`s club, you get
to take her out for a round of golf. The organizer from the strip club
tells David Fahrenthold that on the golf course, the dancers would be
promised – they were that the dancers would wear, quote, pink mini skirts
and what the organizer from the strip club called a, quote, sexy white
Now, if that`s not what you were after, if that is disappointing to you
given what you were going to be spending on this event, the president`s
venue, take heart. After you are allowed to do the golfing thing with the
promised pink mini skirts and the sexy white polos, right after that, the
plan for the event is that everybody leaves the president`s golf club and
goes back to the strip club itself if you get the VIP package,
transportation is provided.
And that`s the part where there would be less clothing than there would be
on the golf course. Again, this is a strip club that advertises full
nudity on a normal day. For this event involving the president`s golf club
and the Trump family crest, the strip club says it would be planning a,
quote, very tasteful burlesque show which only could involve nudity. They
just say, could involve nudity, they`re not promising.
There`s a little ambiguity there, little excitement and suspense as to just
how naked the event would ultimately become.
So, this was reported last night by David Fahrenthold, a Pulitzer Prize-
winning reporter who has followed the money in the Trump business empire
from the beginning of Trump`s term in national politics. In David`s
initial report last night, he got a statement from the Trump Organization
confirming that the nude dancer event is happening at the president`s golf
club. In a statement from the Trump Organization, the business not only
confirmed the event was happening, it bragged for a worthwhile cause, a
Miami charity was reportedly going to get some of the proceeds of this
event after the president`s club got paid its cut.
By this afternoon, the supposed charity beneficiary had announced that they
no longer wanted anything do with this event. So, after that announcement
from the charity backing out, for several hours that, left us with the
impression that this was just going to be the president`s club hosting a
nude dancer auction for money straight up regardless of a worthy cause, but
as we were getting ready to get on the air tonight, about an hour and a
half ago, we got word that after a little bit of national discussion on
this matter driven by “The Washington Post`s” reporting, the president`s
family business has as of tonight decided that they are not going to go
through with this after all.
I mean, obviously, this is fine. I mean, this is – you know, this is what
you might expect from an American presidency. I mean, I blame Obama. Who
among us doesn`t recall how President Obama`s frequent nude dancer auctions
at the private business he and Michelle kept operating while he was
president, that kind of broke the seal in any potential outrage over that
kind of thing. After all his nude dancer auctions.
I`m sure, that`s why the president`s business had been planning this event
why no one much cared until because of the outrage over Obama doing exactly
this kind of thing. No one cared until the ended up on the front page of
the “Washington Post.” I mean, I had been wondering if maybe the Pence
family would show up. It would be interesting to see, would they be more
fiscally responsible and go for the buy it now nude dancer of your choice
or maybe they try their luck with the auction? What do you think, Pence
Again, as of tonight, though, within the last hour or so, we have new this
is has been called up. It`s still up at exoticdancer.com. So, maybe
people will still show. Apparently it has been cancelled.
The idea, though, that President Trump would be trying to profit from
something like this, would be trying to hold an event like this involving
the use of his family crest and all of rest, I mean, it`s sort of just, you
know, Wednesday in an average Trump presidency news cycle.
But on a day like today, it`s hard to avoid that this sort of thing is –
it`s not just a one-off, right? This is what the Trump presidency has been
like in an ongoing way. It seems like it`s going to continue.
I mean, today in addition the strip club nude dancer auction at the
president`s golf club news, in the same news cycle, we also got this
eyebrow raising ruling from a federal judge in Florida, which is about the
Florida massage parlor owner who had mysterious ties to the Chinese
government and Chinese communist party organizations while she was
simultaneously marketing access, literally offering to sell access for cash
to Chinese national who wanted to attend the events with the president and
his family and his cabinet officers at the president`s for-profit club,
The woman in question who has been photographed at Mar-a-Lago, including in
the company of the president, who has herself become a pretty serious
Republican Party fund-raiser in the Trump era, she is the original owner of
a string of massage parlors, but specifically the massage parlor where the
owner of the New England Patriots football team, Robert Kraft, got caught
up in a prostitution sting. Robert Kraft and more than 20 other people
were charged with prostitution offenses related to that massage parlor. He
has pled not guilty, but those charges are pending.
Meanwhile, here is Mr. Kraft having dinner at the president`s table two
days ago at an event honoring the emir of Qatar. And now, I don`t know if
there were massages at that event, but in this presidency, weirdly, you
almost feel like you have to ask.
And now, this federal judge in Florida has just issued the short order,
giving prosecutors the go ahead to file classified evidence with the court
in a related case, because the president`s Mar-a-Lago club, massage parlor,
prostitution ring, cash for access scandal is now affirmed by this judge in
Florida to also have a nexus to a counterintelligence investigation that`s
currently under way into potential Chinese government spying in South
Florida in general and in President Trump`s Mar-a-Lago club in particular.
That nexus gave rise to this order from the federal judge allowing
prosecutors to file classified evidence with the judge, rather than
allowing that evidence to be seen publicly or by the grand jury or even by
the defense. The judge ruled that, quote, the court finds that the
classified information referenced in the government`s motion and memorandum
implicates the government`s classified information privilege because the
information is properly classified and its disclosure could cause serious
damage to the national security of the United States. Quote: It is ordered
that the government is authorized to withhold from the defendant the
specified information outlined in the motion.
In addition to the classified evidence counterintelligence part of that,
the Justice Department is also reportedly investigating whether the massage
parlor corruption scheme around Mar-a-Lago might have involved funneling
foreign donations to Republican Party entity and causes.
Now, to be clear and to be fair here, we should not confusion the various
profit-making enterprises that the president and his family are running
alongside his time in the Oval Office, we should recognize that they are
separate entities here, that they are running as their side business in
addition to the presidency. I mean, let`s be clear. The nude dancer
auction with the we promise they are sexy polo shirts and the mini skirts
and the burlesque show with full nudity afterwards, that`s the president`s
club in Florida that`s called Doral. That is a totally separate
presidential property from the Chinese spying massage parlor prostitution
ring scandal, that one is associated with the president`s other business in
Florida which is called Mar-a-Lago.
So, to be fair, understand that this is both properties totally separate
scandals. And I understand at this point, a couple of years into this, it
can be a little hard to disambiguate these things. We have never have
scandals anything like this with any president ever, let alone multiple
scandals like this running simultaneously. It`s hard to keep them all
But with this president, this is what the news is like now. And on days
like today with news cycles like this, I will admit to finding it a little
– I don`t know if it`s unnerving, it`s at least unsettling that those
kinds of stories I just described from today`s news cycle, those are
unspooling in today`s news alongside this continually devolving scandal in
This today was President Trump`s labor secretary, Alex Acosta, giving a
lengthy press conference in which he addressed his role as a U.S. attorney
in Florida, in a still murky deal in dozen years ago in which he and his
office signed a federal, non-prosecution agreement with Jeffrey Epstein, a
wealthy and well-convicted connected sexual predator who did serve a little
bit of time with generous provisions for work release on state prostitution
charges in Florida.
Alex Acosta is feeling the need to explain his actions from back in the day
related to the Epstein case, because Epstein is now facing decades in
prison, even though Alex Acosta wouldn`t bring charges against Epstein when
he was the U.S. attorney in Florida. And when the FBI amassed enough
evidence for a 50-plus page indictment against Epstein in Florida, when
Acosta was the U.S. attorney there, even though Acosta wouldn`t bring
federal changes against him, somebody else finally did bring considerable
charges against Epstein, in this case for sex trafficking.
Jeffrey Epstein has pled not guilty. He is facing 45 years in prison if he
is convicted and sentenced to the maximum term. Well, today in Washington,
the press conference by Labor Secretary Alex Acosta was designed, it
seemed, to signal that he is not planning on resigning over the scandal.
Labor secretary also took questions. This was clearly him showing he is
willing to face criticism on this matter, willing to face his critics.
But Alex Acosta`s defense started to boomerang on him. This I did not
expect. In a bunch of different ways, what Secretary Acosta did today and
in particular the information he released to the press today seemed to have
made things worse for him in terms of efforts to justify his previous
actions and to justify why he shouldn`t be apologizing now at least if not
resigning over his role in the scandal now that Jeffrey Epstein is facing
federal charges since Acosta couldn`t bring himself to bring similar
charges when he had Epstein in his clutches years ago.
I mean, first of all, there`s the fact that a federal judge has not ruled
that Alex Acosta`s office broke the law when they made this non-prosecution
deal with Jeffrey Epstein without notifying Epstein`s victims that they
were doing so. Acosta is gong to face some sort of sanction in federal
court for having broken the law in that way, right? The judge has already
said Acosta`s office under his leadership broke the law by not telling the
victims about the deal before they did it. We are waiting to find out what
his sanction is going to be from the court.
That itself makes it remarkable that he is still a cabinet official and
hasn`t resigned or been fired. But even today, while mounting the defense
and knowing that that decision from the court is pending in terms of his
fate, Acosta still has no answer on that issue. And he has no apologies
for Epstein`s victims either, even though he was explicitly asked today if
he saw any need that he should apologize to them.
Remember, he did this deal with Epstein without telling Epstein`s victims
that he was doing it, which was against the law. And, in fact, to make it
all worse today, Acosta released a declaration from his lead prosecutor who
worked on the case which include some damning admissions that don`t help
Acosta on it at all.
For example, the materials that Alex handed out to the press today in the
big defensive press conference included this letter in which his lead
prosecutor working under his leadership in his office spelled out
explicitly that Alex Acosta`s office stopped efforts to notify victims
about this non-prosecution deal specifically because Epstein told them to,
because Epstein`s lawyers demanded that they stop telling the victims.
Acosta`s office spells it out explicitly in this letter to Epstein`s
lawyers why they stopped victim notification about Epstein`s deal.
Quote: Three victims were notified shortly after the signing of the non-
prosecution agreement, notified of the general terms of that agreement.
You, meaning you Epstein`s lawyers, raised objections to any victim
notification and no further notifications were done.
So Acosta`s office has already been found by a judge to have broken the law
by not telling the victims about the deal they were giving to Epstein.
Acosta just released information showing us all that his office admitted in
writing that the reason they didn`t notify more victims is because Jeffrey
Epstein told them not to. That`s why they stopped.
I mean, so that`s a problem for Labor Secretary Alex Acosta. That is not
getting better with his supposed defense that he mounted today. In fact,
that would seem like it`s getting worse.
Also, the materials that Acosta distributed today in his own defense
additionally show that his office, Acosta`s office believed that Epstein
was breaking the terms of the non-prosecution agreement they had signed him
up to. Quote: It is clear neither you nor your client ever intended to
abide by the terms of the agreement that he signed. They put that in
writing. Acosta`s office, Acosta`s prosecutors saying, you were never
intending to abide by that deal.
Well, OK. I mean, once you have got an alleged perpetrator who you decided
to give a non-prosecution agreement to for whatever reason, once that
perpetrator violates the terms of that agreement, then deal`s off.
Agreement`s broken. You are no longer bound by it. Prosecute away, right?
But Alex Acosta`s office never prosecuted Jeffrey Epstein. And Acosta in
his own defense released this information today, I mean, purportedly as
part of the reason you are supposed to feel better about his actions. It
doesn`t make things any better for him. In fact, and it would seem to make
You not only gave Epstein this deal, your office believed that Epstein
broke the deal and you still didn`t prosecute him?
And the even bigger problem for Acosta is that what he strode to the podium
to say today, his main argument for why he did this non-prosecution deal
with Epstein back in the day was that he was actually trying to be the real
hero in the Epstein case. In the past, Acosta has been able to be vague in
his justifications for why he did this agreement to not prosecute. He`s
been able to be vague about it because he never faced all that much
pressure. He didn`t find the scandal to be any sort of barrier to the
Trump administration, picking him to be in the cabinet.
But now, Acosta is under pressure and so, now, he is having to spell it out
and the main case he made today is that he had to do this non-prosecution
deal with Epstein because the state of Florida was screwing it up.
Remember he was the federal prosecutor there. He said state prosecutors
had evidence on Epstein, but they were not going to be able to get a proper
conviction or proper sentence.
And so, Acosta had to swoop in with this inexplicable deal. A federal non-
prosecution deal that would have Epstein pleading guilty to one state
charge and doing time in a county jail where he got let out every day on
work release where his private driver picked him up and drove him home.
Today in response to Secretary Acosta`s press conference, the top state
prosecutor on the Epstein case responded with a written statement. Quote:
I can emphatically state that Mr. Acosta`s recollection of this matter is
completely wrong. My office, the state attorneys` office, took the local
police department`s investigation of Epstein to a grand jury and subpoenaed
witnesses. The grand jury returned a single count indictment, a felony
solicitation of prostitution, a third-degree felony.
Subsequently, so thereafter, the U.S. attorney`s office, Alex Acosta`s
office produced a 53-page indictment that was abandoned after secret
negotiations between Jeffrey Epstein`s lawyers and Mr. Acosta. The state
attorney`s office was not a party to those meetings and negotiations and
definitely had no part in the federal non-prosecution agreement.
No matter how my office, meaning how the state office resolved the state
charges, the U.S. attorney`s office, Alex Acosta`s office, always had the
ability to file its own federal charges. If Mr. Acosta was truly concerned
that the state`s case and felt he had to rescue the matter, he would have
moved forward with the 53-page federal indictment that his own office
drafted. Instead, Alex Acosta brokered a secret plea deal that resulted in
a non-prosecution agreement. It closes: Mr. Acosta should not be allowed
to rewrite history.
So honestly, bottom line, this just turned out to be an unusually gross day
in the news even for the Trump era. If I had access to a shower in my
office, I would have used it to get through the process of reading on these
developing stories. But as a legal matter and as a political matter in
terms of the future of this cabinet official, it does seem to me like this
cabinet official, Labor Secretary Alex Acosta made the case against himself
worse today with this defense he rolled out, which is immediately contested
by the person who the defense pointed at.
And also with the specific information that he handed out to the press
about the Jeffrey Epstein case and how it was handled under his leadership
at the U.S. attorney`s office in Florida.
That said, I`m not a lawyer. I`m just an easily grossed out middle aged
person who reads the news for a living. So, that is my sense. But we
ought to check it out with somebody who knows these things.
Joining us now is Chuck Rosenberg, former U.S. attorney, former senior FBI
and Justice Department official.
Chuck, it is great to see you. Thanks very much for making time to be here
CHUCK ROSENBERG, MSNBC CONTRIBUTOR: Glad to be here, Rachel.
MADDOW: So, I understand that you were able to see Acosta`s press
conference today and look at some of the materials that he handed out. Let
me ask you about the impression that I had as a non-lawyer looking at the
materials, feeling like at least the public case, the non-legal case Acosta
is making to justify his position, his actions in the Epstein case seem
worse. They don`t seem to me to be helped by the material he distributed.
ROSENBERG: He said a couple of things that made sense. I can start with
that, because it`s much shorter and a bunch of things that made no sense at
The things that made sense, Rachel, these are hard cases and you want to be
very sensitive to the victims. That`s where the logic in his press
conference ended, right?
There is no – the state`s attorney in Florida is 100 percent right. If
Alex Acosta thought that the case was not properly handled by the state, he
had the complete ability to bring charges federally. They had the draft
He did say that the cases are hard. Again, I will reiterate. They are
hard. But they had more than 30 minor child victims in this case. Even if
a bunch didn`t want to testify and I completely understand that, some
And oh, by the way, if some number would not and didn`t feel like they had
the quantum of proof they needed, they simply could have continued the
investigation until they did. There was no sort of time stamp on this.
There was no urgency to negotiate a non-pros agreement. It doesn`t add up.
It doesn`t make sense, Rachel.
MADDOW: Let me drill down on the last point you were making there, because
this was something that dawned on me today that I had not previously
appreciated with this case. I mean, Acosta has basically said that he
didn`t feel like he could bring charges for whatever reason. I mean,
there`s chapter and verse on this.
He didn`t feel like he could bring charges. That doesn`t mean though, that
he had to bring an affirmative non-prosecution agreement regardless of what
the state did. Acosta could have just let this investigation run. He
affirmatively chose to enter into this non-prosecution agreement without
any imperative to do so.
ROSENBERG: That`s right. So, first of all, just for context, we don`t
normally, in fact, we don`t routinely or almost ever end cases with a non-
prosecution agreement. If we don`t have a case, we simply don`t bring it.
So, there was no reason, no need to enter into a non-prosecution agreement.
Putting that aside, there was absolutely no time limit on the
investigation. The Southern District of New York, god bless them just
indicted the case, right? There is no statute of limitations problem.
So, if the Florida – if the federal prosecutors in Florida thought they
didn`t have enough, all they had to do was continue their work. It was
MADDOW: Chuck, one last question for you. Another thing that struck me as
something that I wanted to ask you about because I didn`t really understand
the implication, was that Secretary Acosta said repeatedly words to the
effect of this was a different time. Meaning I think he was implying that
cases like this 12 years ago were handled in a very different way, we
didn`t have the same sensitivities, maybe we didn`t have the same legal
He seemed to imply that this is a different era for pursuing a trafficking
case or the kind of case that SDNY is producing against Epstein right now
compared to how it was back then.
ROSENBERG: Way, way, way back in 2007, in the dark ages of federal
prosecution, I can assure you, Rachel, there were thousands of prosecutors
and cops and agents around the country making difficult sex crimes cases.
Look, we are trained in this way. We know how to work with victims. The
notion that we couldn`t bring such a case all the way back in 2007 is
deeply wrong and deeply dangerous – and by the way, deeply insulting to
the men and women who are doing this kind of work.
MADDOW: Chuck Rosenberg, former U.S. attorney, former senior FBI and
Justice Department official – invaluable counsel for us on nights like
tonight. Chuck, thank you very much.
ROSENBERG: My pleasure.
MADDOW: All right. Senator Bernie Sanders going to be here live with us
in just a moment.
Stay with us.
MADDOW: So every day, there is new news on the polls and the fund-raising
numbers and even the evolving logistics of the gigantic Democratic
presidential primary and, you know, we can run through that stuff any time
you want. There is an infinite supply of that any day of the week. But
that horse race stuff will always be with us and it is only part of the way
the competition is being waged.
If you are, for example, Senator Bernie Sanders waging your second run for
the presidency in four years, this week, for example, has been very, very
busy already and it`s only Wednesday. Yesterday, Senator Sanders announced
a bicameral resolution, a House and Senate resolution to declare the
climate crisis the national emergency. It is a national emergency
resolution. This follows, of course, President Trump declaring a pulled
out of thin air national emergency to build his border wall and
inexplicably to sell weapons to Saudi Arabia for its war in Yemen.
That resolution from Senator Sanders calling to declare a climate crisis a
national emergency, that was yesterday. And then, today, the senator
released what he`s calling his anti-endorsement list in which he quotes
FDR: I ask you to judge me by the enemies I have made.
In Senator Sanders` case, that`s a list by his own accounting that includes
a bunch of billionaires and CEOs of Fortune 500 companies and titans of
Wall Street like the former heads of JPMorgan Chase and Goldman Sachs, as
well as former Federal Reserve Alan Greenspan, a whole list of famous dudes
who have all criticized him by name.
In unveiling this extraordinary list, Senator Sanders accused the people on
that list of having a, quote, vested interest in preserving the status quo,
so that they can continue to exploit working people across America. Quote:
We welcome their hatred.
Then, just tonight, Senator Sanders wrote an op-ed in “The Washington
Post”. The headline you can see there, the straightest path to racial
equality is through the 1 percent. Quote: The unfortunate truth is that
politicians who take checks from millionaires and billionaires owe their
corporate constituents first and everyday Americans last.
The black-white wealth gap could be closed by targeting the extreme wealth
at the very top. Instead, politicians beholden to the 1 percent ask the
black middle class and white middle class to fight over the scraps.
Busy, right? Busy.
Joining us now for “The Interview”, Senator Bernie Sanders from the great
state of Vermont, candidate for the Democratic nomination for president in
Senator, it`s great to see you. Thanks for being here.
SEN. BERNIE SANDERS (I-VT), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Good to be with you,
MADDOW: I`m not – promise, I`m not going to ask you horse race and
process questions, but I do want to know – I mean, in 2016, pretty soon
into it, you were essentially running in a two-person primary. How is it
different to run in a two-million-person primary?
SANDERS: It is very different.
SANDERS: I mean, I think the difference is the last time, we had to win 50
percent of the vote in order to win a state and we ended up winning 22
states. I think this time around, I doubt that anybody will come close to
50 percent of the vote in any state.
SANDERS: So, you are talking about candidates getting 25 or 30 percent of
I feel very good with the fact that we have now received some $2 million
individual contributions which I think is all time world record up to this
point, averaging all of $19 apiece. We have over a million volunteers. We
have strong organizations in the early states, Iowa and New Hampshire, et
cetera. So, we are feeling pretty good.
MADDOW: Knowing that that ceiling might be different in terms of what`s
possible, even for the strongest campaigns in the early states, how do you
change your strategy to account for that? Your ad play (ph)? What do you
SANDERS: Well, I think it`s more aggressively getting out the vote and
grassroots organizing. I mean, at the end of the day, you`re just going to
have to get people out to the caucuses and get votes in the primaries in
order to win. And that means having strong organizations in the states and
having a strong volunteer movement. And I think we have both.
MADDOW: In terms of the character of the primary this far, we are not that
far into it. We had the one debate and there`s still a ton of people who
are in the field. But a lot of people had remarked on the fact that people
are playing your song. That a lot of your progressive policy positions
that you staked out not only over the course of your career but in your
2016 campaign –
MADDOW: – are now much more centrist positions among this field.
Is that just a matter of satisfaction for you or does that give you new
work to do?
SANDERS: Well, both. It is a deep sense of satisfaction. I mean, you
followed the last campaign. You were there in the debates.
SANDERS: And many of the ideas that I brought forth, $15 an hour minimum
wage. Hey, Bernie, you`re crazy. That`s too extreme. In a few days, the
U.S. House of Representatives is going to pass a $15 an hour minimum wage.
Bernie, public colleges and universities, tuition free, that can`t be done.
University of Texas today announced the families $60,000 or under free
tuition, and all over the country, people are moving in that direction.
Dealing with student debt. Oh, Bernie, that can`t be done. Well, now,
you`re hearing a whole lot of people are understanding that it is an
outrage, it really is criminal that you have young people out there who
can`t get married and can`t have kids because they are dealing with
incredible rates of student debt right now.
Dealing with climate change as a national security issue. I was asked at
one debate, the one that – I don`t know if it was that you`re in, Bernie,
what is the major crisis we face, ISIS, al Qaeda, what is it? I said it is
climate change. And people kind of laughed. But they are not laughing
Health care as a human right. Oh, Bernie, that`s not – that`s un-
American. Nobody in America believes that. The last poll that I saw, 60
or 70 percent of the American people believe in a Medicare-for-All, single-
So, the good news is we have moved – not only have we moved the debate, we
moved legislation in states and in the federal government.
But now, what has to be done, Rachel, and I think I`m the only candidate
who will tell you this, is that at the end of the day, it`s not good enough
to talk about Medicare-for-all, to talk about being aggressive on climate
change. What we have got to do is understand there is a reason why in the
last 30 years, the top 1 percent have seen an increase in their wealth of
$21 trillion, while wealth has gone down for the bottom half. Why 500,000
people are sleeping out in the street, why we are the only major country
not to guarantee health care to all people, or parental leave, or sick and
medical leave. There is a reason.
And the reason is and what this campaign is about is finally saying that if
you want real change, we need a political revolution. And what does that
mean? It means we are going to have to take on Wall Street and the
insurance companies –
SANDERS: – and the drug companies and the fossil fuel industry and the
military industrial complex and the prison industrial complex.
In other words, we can talk about all the great things we want to do, but
at the end of the day, to understand why we are where we are, where the
middle class is shrinking, where 40 million people live in poverty, we have
to understand the political reality and the power structure of America.
We are prepared to take those guys on, and that`s why I say,
unapologetically – I am not afraid of those people. They want to condemn.
You know, the billionaires want to condemn, that I`m an existential threat
to the Democratic Party – so, be it. We are going to take them on.
MADDOW: In terms of how that translates, practically. I`m hearing echoes
of your first answer in the debate in Miami. When the question was along
the lines of what do you want to do first? And you talked about this need
for a political revolution –
MADDOW: – and the need to take to sort of take on multi-front battles –
MADDOW: – all at the same time.
If you were elected president in 2020, odds are, I don`t know, let`s guess,
50/50 that Senator Mitch McConnell would still be the leader of the
Republicans in the Senate and they still hold the majority there. You know
for being in the Senate what that means in terms of the power of getting
MADDOW: If – I know you don`t want McConnell to still be there.
MADDOW: If he is still there –
MADDOW: – what would you put on his plate first? What would you – what
will be your first legislative priority?
SANDERS: I`ll tell you, before I put anything on his plate, I would be in
the state of Kentucky holding a rally, with tens of thousands of people, to
say to what is, in fact, one of the poorest states in this country, a real
struggling state in Kentucky, that we need to raise the minimum wage, a
state which is really suffering for lack of health care.
We`re going to rally the American people in Kentucky. We`re going to rally
the American people in Mississippi. We`re going to rally the people in
South Carolina to demand that their representatives – I know this is a
radical idea – actually do what the American people want.
The point that I make over and over again, Rachel, is the ideas that I talk
about are ideas that the American people want. They don`t get it because
you got a Congress indebted to wealthy campaign contributors.
And, by the way, whether you call it socialism or social democracy or
progressive government, everything that I`m talking about exists in
countries like Norway, Sweden, Denmark, where they have health care for
all, where they have strong universal child care programs, where college
education is free.
These are not radical ideas, but we need to rally the American people by
the millions. That`s what I mean by a political revolution.
And as president, that`s what I will help lead. We will give Mitch
McConnell something he cannot afford to refuse. And that is we`re going to
give him millions of people demanding he take action on the issues
impacting the working class of this country.
MADDOW: We`ll be right back with Senator Bernie Sanders, Democratic 2020
presidential candidate, right after this.
Stay with us.
MADDOW: We`re back with Senator Bernie Sanders of the great state of
Vermont. He is running to be the Democratic nominee for president of the
Senator Sanders, thank you again for sticking with us.
You talked about climate change as an emergency. And indeed, this week,
you introduced bicameral legislation with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez in the
House to declare a climate emergency.
You have also said just this week that you will be coming out with the
strongest climate change plan in the current Democratic field. And I know
you haven`t released details, but how do you define it as the strongest?
What is it?
SANDERS: What it will do – and there are other good plans out there. I
don`t mean to denigrate other plans.
What it will do is essentially tell the fossil fuel industry that they
cannot continue to destroy this planet for the sake of their short-term
profits. I mean, just stop and think about it. They lie every day. They
are obfuscating reality. They`re making huge amounts of money and, oh, by
the way, they`re destroying the planet.
So, somebody has got to say, sorry, you know, we don`t accept people
shooting down other people. You are destroying the planet. Thousands and
thousands of people will die as a result of what you`re doing. It has to
We have to transform our energy system and energy efficiency, sustainable
energy. We need a new transportation system as well.
And the other point here, Rachel, is obviously this is not just an American
issue. This is a global issue by definition.
We need a president not like Trump who doesn`t even accept the reality of
climate change, thinks it`s a hoax, we need a president who says every
country on Earth that, you know what, you are in this. China, you`re in
it. Russia, India, Brazil, Africa, we are all in this together.
And maybe – and I know this may be a pipe dream, I admit it, but maybe in
this crisis, planetary crisis, maybe we move the world to say that instead
of spending a trillion and a half dollars every year on weapons of
destruction designed to kill each other, maybe we can use those resources
to fight our common enemy, which is climate change.
And as president, I would love the opportunity to lead that effort.
MADDOW: Ii think about a corporate-driven effort like that, going at the
fossil fuel industry, going at big oil and energy, holding them accountable
for their role in climate change and I can envision an agenda like that in
the United States. But then when you start to talk about the rest of the
world, I think about Saudi Aramco, and I think about the big state
controlled oil companies in our economic rivals around the world, and I
can`t imagine them not just seeing that as a competitive advantage.
SANDERS: Well, the answer is, is to rally the people in those countries.
I think ordinary people in most of the countries understand that if we
don`t act boldly, the planet we`re going to be leaving to our kids and
grandchildren will be increasingly unhealthy and uninhabitable.
MADDOW: But as a U.S. president, you couldn`t rally the Saudi people or
the Chinese people.
SANDERS: Actually, you could.
MADDOW: You could?
SANDERS: Actually, you could.
MADDOW: How does that work in Riyadh?
SANDERS: See if Mohamed bin Salman will let me into the country.
MADDOW: For starters, yes.
SANDERS: But I do think – I mean, people throughout the world understand
the threat. And we need a grassroots movement globally – now, we`re
beginning to see, it`s especially led by the young people, you know?
And I think – we are fighting for the future of the planet. This is an
existential crisis. So, we have to act in a way we have never acted
before. And I think it`s the people of the planet saying to oil companies
all over this world – stop it. We cannot allow you to destroy the planet.
MADDOW: Let me ask you about another international effort that has been
something you and I have talked about before in interviews over the years.
I was struck by new polling that shows that even Iraq and Afghanistan
veterans do not believe that the Iraq and Afghanistan wars were worth
fighting. And there are not big differences between the veterans who have
fought those wars and the American people broadly in these issues.
And you have told me in the past and I know that you have been assiduous in
your work on this in the past about wanting to get American troops out of
these conflicts. Why is it so intractable? Why as a – why are presidents
as desperate as President Obama and President Trump both unable to achieve
the stated goal of getting troops even just home from Afghanistan?
SANDERS: By the way, that`s a good question. Before I answer it, I`m the
former chairman of the Veterans Committee –
SANDERS: – in the Senate and I talked to many of those veterans. And the
kind of trauma that they went through is something that we should never
dismiss, will never forget.
They know, unlike Donald Trump, what the cost of war really is. They saw
their friends blown up. They came back without an arm or leg or with PTSD.
But to answer your question, I think we need political will here. We need
to do everything that we can to make sure that those countries around the
world, and right now, I`m not even just thinking about Iraq or Syria. I`m
thinking about Saudi Arabia and Iran.
We have spent, not only have we lost thousands of lives, Rachel, we have
spent I believe $5 trillion on the war on terror, $5 trillion.
And our job as the most powerful country on Earth is to bring Saudi Arabia,
which is a terribly despotic government, and Iran, which is also
undemocratic, bring them in to the damn room and saying, we`re not going to
be fighting eternal wars. You guys, we`re here. You`ve got to work it
out, but don`t think that the United States is going to get involved in
MADDOW: Let me ask you on the issue of veterans. You have been a champion
MADDOW: And as I mentioned, a lot of your fellow candidates are now
onboard with you on that, including people saying from the dais in Miami,
I`m with Bernie on this.
What happens to veterans care under Medicare-for-All?
SANDERS: We strength – the V.A. is a separate entity and it must remain
as a separate entity because veterans have unique problems. So, we
maintain the Veterans Administration and we strengthen it.
MADDOW: Senator, can you stick with us for one more segment?
MADDOW: We`ll be right back with Senator Bernie Sanders right after this.
Stay with us.
MADDOW: We`re back with Vermont senator and 2020 Democratic presidential
candidate, Bernie Sanders.
Senator, thank you again for sticking with us.
SANDERS: My pleasure.
MADDOW: The last question for you and it is a little bit of sticky wicket
and I do not want you to be annoyed for asking. But it is the thing –
when I talked to people about having on the show today, it was the number
one thing people wanted me to ask you about, which was the issue raised by
Eric Swalwell, who has now dropped out of the race for president, in the
debate, when he – and he directed it to Vice President Biden and his
refrain was pass the torch. That you`ve had your chance, you`ve been in
politics for a long time and we need younger leadership basically.
Basically making an overt age argument for why Vice President Biden
shouldn`t be the nominee and implicitly why you shouldn`t be the nominee.
You called that ageist after the debate. But I wonder how you grapple with
the substance of that argument.
SANDERS: You know, if you look at history, there were arguments why black
people shouldn`t be president, why women shouldn`t be president. I think
you have to look at the totality of the person. There were some people who
are 90 who are a lot more active and energetic than people who are 50.
You have to look at what somebody believes, what somebody is fighting for,
what their experience is about. Just to look at age is I think missing the
boat in a very, very deep way.
MADDOW: But he is talking about length of experience in the political
MADDOW: I mean, you`ve been in public office since before Eric Swalwell
was born. I mean, he`s saying, people who have been in the system, who`ve
been trying all this time to make change, you need to get out of the way so
that new voices can (INAUDIBLE).
SANDERS: And what is his – those people`s positions? Do they believe in
Medicare-for-All? Have they fought to raise the minimum wage? Have they
been a leader in tackling the issues of climate change? Have they been on
picket lines their whole life standing with working people, been active in
the women`s movement, active in the gay movement?
In other words, it`s just not good enough to say, hey, I`m young. Pass me
You`ve got to tell me what you stand for, what your vision of America is.
And I think that that is just not a satisfactory explanation.
MADDOW: Senator Sanders, it`s great to have you here.
SANDERS: Good to be with you.
MADDOW: Come back soon.
MADDOW: We`ll be right back. Stay with us.
MADDOW: That`s going to do it for us tonight. We`ll see you again
tomorrow when Senator Kamala Harris is going to be here with us.
Now, it`s time for “THE LAST WORD WITH LAWRENCE O`DONNELL”.
Good evening, Lawrence.
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY
Copyright 2019 ASC Services II Media, LLC. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of ASC Services II Media, LLC. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.>
Copyright 2019 ASC Services II Media, LLC. All materials herein are
protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced,
distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the
prior written permission of ASC Services II Media, LLC. You may not alter
or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the