Rep Escobar: “I’m Ready to Impeach”. TRANSCRIPT: 9/23/19, The Last Word w/ Lawrence O’Donnell.
ALI VELSHI, MSNBC HOST: Thank you, Rachel. You have a good evening.
RACHEL MADDOW, MSNBC HOST: Indeed. Thank you.
VELSHI: All right. The breaking news of the hour you just heard on
Rachel`s show, another House Democrat announcing she is now in favor of
moving forward with the impeachment of President Trump. Elaine Luria is
part of a group of seven Democrats with backgrounds in national security
who just released an op-ed in the “Washington Post” saying this latest
Trump scandal is a threat they are sworn to protect against.
One of those seven, Abigail Spanberger, will be speaking with Lawrence at
this hour tomorrow night. But coming up in a moment, we`ll talk to two
members of the Democratic Caucus in the House about that growing tide for
Mitt Romney tweeted his concerns about what the president is accused of
doing and tonight Romney spoke on camera. And another Republican senator
expressed concerns too this evening.
Plus, former Governor Bill Weld, Rick Wilson and Jen Rubin will be here to
discuss the muted reaction from the GOP.
And at the end of the show, the rise of Elizabeth Warren in the Democratic
Party. Her momentum continues in the latest polls and this weekend both
she and Joe Biden took to the picket lines with striking UAW members.
But tonight, we start with growing calls for an impeachment inquiry to
president Trump, calls that are being driven by a presidential admission
for the record books. The president of the United States appeared to
suggest that he spoke with a foreign leader about a political opponent and
implied that he wanted that leader, the president of Ukraine, to
investigate that political opponent. It`s a conversation that sits at the
center of a whistleblower`s complaint about alleged abuse of power within
the White House.
Now, we know that Lawrence typically doesn`t play a lot of sound from
President Trump at this hour, but this is a remarkable notion, that a
sitting president would push a foreign government to investigate a domestic
political rival. It`s a piece of tape that you do actually have to see to
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: The conversation I had was
largely congratulatory, was largely corruption, all of the corruption
taking place, was largely the fact that we don`t want our people, like Vice
President Biden and his son, creating to the corruption already in the
(END VIDEO CLIP)
VELSHI: All right. Trump and his allies spent days denying that there was
any “there” there, and then Trump seemed to admit on camera that he had
raised the issue in a call with the Ukrainian president. And while we`re
at it, we should note that numerous fact checkers have not found any
evidence of the corruption that Donald Trump claims exists.
Trump said at the United Nations, quote: it was a perfect phone call. And
this morning, the president took things a step further. He suggested a
link between his administration`s review of military aid to Ukraine and his
efforts to persuade the Ukrainian president to pursue damaging material
about a political rival.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: It`s very important to talk about corruption. If you don`t talk
about corruption, why would you give money to a country that you think is
corrupt? One of the reasons the new president got elected is he was going
to stop corruption. So, it`s very important that on occasion you speak to
somebody about corruption. Very important.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
VELSHI: OK. The president later denied promising aid in exchange for an
investigation. But even if there was no promise of quid pro quo, it`s hard
to see how Trump isn`t abusing the office of the president to further his
own political future.
One more note about the controversial phone call in question. It happened
just one day after former special counsel Robert Mueller testified before
Congress about Russian interference in the 2016 election.
Here`s how former Secretary of State John Kerry described the president`s
actions on “MORNING JOE”.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JOHN KERRY, FORMER SECRETARY OF STATE: My reaction is one of absolute
shock and amazement that apparently within hours of the – or days of the
Mueller testimony the president is on the telephone putting American
foreign policy ad hoc while he extorts the leader of another country to
Russia`s advantage, I might add. I mean, there`s another instance of the
president putting the heat on saying to the country we`re trying to help,
resist Russia, and he turns around and says, I`m going to take your aid
away unless you become the opposition research center for my campaign for
president of the United States. That is a fundamental profound abuse of
(END VIDEO CLIP)
VELSHI: All right. Tonight, NBC News is reporting that House Democratic
leaders have called a members-only caucus meeting tomorrow afternoon to
discuss both the impeachment inquiry and congressional investigations into
Trump ahead of Acting Director of National Intelligence Joseph Maguire`s
appearance in front of the House Intelligence Committee on Tuesday – on
Now, that meeting was announced as more Democrats have come out in support
of an impeachment inquiry against president Trump in the wake of these
revelations about his conversation with the president of Ukraine.
Joining me now, Democratic Congresswoman Debbie Dingell of Michigan. She`s
a member of the House Democratic leadership.
And Congressman Bill Foster of Illinois. He`s a member of the Financial
Services Committee, and he does support an impeachment inquiry against
Welcome to both of you. Thank you for joining us tonight.
Congresswoman Dingell, good to see you again. Thank you for being with us.
You have been – you`ve been cautious about talking about impeachment. You
are one of those people who has believed that, look, maybe your
constituents and their particular needs in Michigan are not met by an
impeachment inquiry. Now there`s more to talk about on that front.
Does that have any influence on your thinking?
REP. DEBBIE DINGELL (D-MI): What`s happened in the last week greatly
disturbs me. I`d said yesterday and I`m just going to be very frank
tonight, we are a divided country and that scares me. But we cannot be
divided on following the rule of law. And what we have heard in the last
week is deeply disturbing.
As members of Congress, we have a fundamental responsibility to protect our
national security and to protect the Constitution. We have no choice now
but to launch an investigation that is going to give us the facts. That is
our moral responsibility.
So I guess I`m joining with many of my other colleagues. And I hope my
Republican colleagues will think about this because they too need to be
concerned about rule of the law.
VELSHI: When you say this to your Republican colleagues, what`s the thing
about this that pushes you into that camp that says we need to begin an
inquiry? What`s different about this? What is it that you want
Republicans who have until now not budged on this with the exception of one
member of Congress, what is it about this particular revelation that makes
it so much more serious for you and others?
DINGELL: So I remember a long time ago – not that long ago, but I worked
for Senator Bob Griffin. And I was a senior in high school, actually, but
at the time, the Watergate investigation was going on, and I flew back with
him from Michigan to Washington the day he announced that he thought that
Richard Nixon should resign. And he had a long talk with me that day about
honesty and integrity.
But after, when people heard those Watergate tapes and saw the facts,
Republicans, there hadn`t been a single Republican in that direction. They
heard the tapes and Richard Nixon resigned in 17 days.
We are being given facts now. We are being told that our president is
talking to a leader of another country, taking dollars that have been
appropriate bid the United States Congress to protect us militarily and
part of the whole foreign policy and is using them to blackmail a president
of another country. That`s simply not OK.
VELSHI: Congresswoman, you are now saying that you do favor an
investigation. What does that mean technically for you? Do you tell –
you`re a member of leadership. What does that mean?
You`re having this meeting with caucus members tomorrow. Do you do
something ahead of that? Do you tell somebody?
DINGELL: I told leadership tonight that I was going to be talking about
this tonight. And, you know, if you read “The New York Times,” you heard I
was going in that direction.
But I probably talked to 30 or 40 members in the last 48 hours. There are
a lot of members that are deeply disturbed about what is happening. And by
the way, we stilt have to make sure. Richard Nixon created the EPA. He
went to China, Title IX. He did a lot of things as this investigation was
We still have the responsibility to lower drug prices for our constituents,
to get a trade deal that`s going to help the striking UAW workers. But we
have a moral responsibility to protect our Constitution. And our job is to
protect our national security.
VELSHI: And when you call for an investigation, in your mind is that the
same as an impeachment investigation?
DINGELL: It`s the same thing, yes.
Representative Foster, thank you for joining us.
REP. BILL FOSTER (D-IL): Happy to be here.
VELSHI: You had been in favor of an impeachment inquiry or impeachment
investigation until now. Tell me what you make of what you have learned.
FOSTER: Well, I think for most members it`s not an issue really just of
criminality. After all, you know, Michael Cohen is in jail today for
things he did at the direction of President Trump.
But the way our system works is that it is a political decision jointly
held between the Senate and the house. And we have to have both branches
of the legislature come together with an agreement that the criminality
exists and is of a high enough level that the person should be removed from
office so that he can stand trial in the normal criminal courts.
And that is the tough part of this I think for many members of Congress
because there`s frankly a political danger here. If we vote articles of
impeachment in the house and then the Senate doesn`t accept them, then
there`s a danger that we will have established the de facto precedent, that
it is OK to do this as long as you can intimidate 51 members of the Senate
into ignoring the problem.
VELSHI: Let me just bring you up to speed on more breaking news we have on
this story. “The Washington Post” is now reporting Trump ordered a hold on
military aid days before calling Ukrainian president. That`s according to
officials. This is just being reported by “The Washington Post.” it says
that – Congresswoman Dingell, it says President Trump told his Acting
Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney to hold back nearly $400 million to Ukraine at
least a week before a phone call in which Trump is said to have pressured
the Ukrainian president to investigate the son of former Vice President Joe
Biden, according to three senior administration officials.
This is the kind of thing that has got people turning their heads, that
there may have been a fairly absolute and clear quid pro quo implied by the
president if there was aid going to a country that the United States and
the Congress had decided that it was supporting, particularly in some of
its efforts to stand up against Russian expansionism.
And then this was held off and then a request goes to the president of that
country. It`s sort of unheard of in American democracy.
FOSTER: That`s why we have to see the complaint. We have to see the
whistleblower`s complaint. We have to see the details. And we have to see
the potentially multiple actions that the president has taken which have
been alluded to in some of the press coverage here.
VELSHI: Congresswoman Dingell?
DINGELL: You know, what people have read that may not understand is that
the inspector general listened to this whistleblower`s case, was so
concerned, reported to the Congress that there was a threat to our national
security and the administration blocked, sending what they found to the
What is this administration hiding? If there`s nothing to hide, they
should have sent that last week. We`ll see what happens on Thursday. But
this is just very deeply disturbing. And no, none of us that have been
sworn to protect this United States of America should be able to turn a
blind eye to what`s happening here.
VELSHI: Congressman Adam Schiff said yesterday that this becomes a
different conversation, this is not just about the president seeking help
in diminishing a political opponent, but it also has to do with the idea
that we are doing exactly the very specific thing that this whole Russia
investigation, the whole Mueller investigation was about.
Are we actually inviting a foreign government to interfere in our
conversations, in our national dialogue, Congressman Foster?
FOSTER: Well, I think that a lot of this depends on the details of exactly
what was asked. And I think, again, we just need to get – we need to get
more of the details on what was requested. I`m also very concerned about
what Giuliani has apparently done in acting as the president`s lawyer and
directly contacting the Ukrainian officials.
VELSHI: Right, which is a little unusual, right? Because Rudy Giuliani,
Congresswoman Dingell, is the president`s personal lawyer and a lot of the
appearances we`ve seen from him on TV have been related to what the
president did as president or not in an official capacity or at least
that`s been his argument.
There could be no argument about a phone call that occurred in the middle
of 2019 about whether this is President Donald – Donald Trump as citizen
or Donald Trump as president.
DINGELL: No, there can`t. You know what really worries me, if you read
the Mueller report, and very few people talk about this, is that Russia is
trying to divide us as a country. We are more divided than I`ve certainly
seen in my lifetime. And I – we`ve got a – a foreign government`s trying
to do this to us. This is a very concerning time.
And we are really protecting who we are as Americans and the future of our
VELSHI: Congresswoman – Representative Debbie Dingell who has now said on
this show that you will be supporting an impeachment inquiry. Congressman
Bill Foster of Illinois – thank you both for joining us tonight.
DINGELL: Thank you.
FOSTER: Thank you.
VELSHI: Joining us now is Bill Weld, the former Republican governor of
Massachusetts, who is running for the Republican presidential nomination
against President Trump. Governor Weld is also the former U.S. attorney
for the district of Massachusetts and the former U.S. attorney – assistant
attorney general for the criminal division. He began his legal career as
counsel with the House Judiciary Committee during Watergate.
Governor, good to see you again. Thanks for being here.
BILL WELD (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Ali, always a pleasure. Thank you.
VELSHI: This is new territory. You`ve been involved for a long time. And
as Congresswoman Dingell said, you know, she learned some of her lessons
about the role of honesty in politics from Watergate.
This is –
WELD: So did I, by the way.
VELSHI: I know. This is where I was going with this. This is different
territory. This is – I mean, do you have examples of this, a president
asking a foreign leader –
WELD: No, no. I`ve never seen anything like this. I`ve never seen such
clear and convincing evidence of obstruction of justice as I did in the
Mueller report, the ten instances that they put in that report, that
President Trump committed trying to kill the Mueller investigation.
This stuff, calling up the president of Ukraine days after suspending $250
million or $400 million in military aid to Ukraine, which is engaged in hot
war, conflict with our enemy, Russia, we`re supporting Ukraine, Russia`s on
the other side with firepower. Russia is an enemy of the United States.
The president is giving aid and comfort to our enemy Russia by trying to
pressure another foreign leader to corruptly deliver the U.S. election in a
case where he himself is a candidate by trashing his opponent.
I mean, there couldn`t be a clearer example of the sort of behavior that
the impeachment clause in the Constitution is aimed at. If we sit still
for this, and he`s daring us to stop him – let`s be honest. If we sit
still for this and say what lovely new clothes the emperor has, we may as
well tear up the Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, the Pledge
of Allegiance with the claim that we`re all indivisible with liberty and
justice for all.
That`s not what he wants. He doesn`t want a country that`s indivisible.
He wants a country that`s divided. And if we put our necks to the yoke
here, shame on us.
VELSHI: You were referring moments ago to new reporting in “The Washington
Post” that Donald Trump has – had ordered a hold on military aid about a
week before this phone call with the president of the Ukraine, of Ukraine.
President Trump told his – I`m reading from “The Washington Post.” Told
his Acting Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney to hold back almost $400 million in
military aid for Ukraine at least a week before a phone call in which Trump
is said to have pressured the Ukrainian president to investigate the son of
former Vice President Joe Biden, according to three senior administration
Not only have we taken a position in Ukraine to help them fend off the
expansionist tendencies of Russia, but they`re not in a position to say no
to a request made by the president of the United States.
WELD: Yes. No, I get it. And President Trump is like every dumb criminal
defendant I`ve ever prosecuted. They all think, oh, if it`s not in
writing, they can`t prove anything.
That`s not true. Circumstantial evidence is more powerful than eyewitness
testimony. Any prosecutor will tell you that. And the president thinks,
well, I suspend this aid and then – it`s days later. Not an hour but days
later that I call and pressure the president to get dirt on Hunter Biden
and Joe Biden, who I President Trump think is my opponent.
What are we, fools, deaf dumb and blind? I mean, the president`s in a
world of his own here, as is so often the case.
VELSHI: So we`ve seen an increase in the number of Republicans – sorry,
Democrats who have come out and said they`ll support impeachment inquiry.
Representative Debbie Dingell of Michigan has just said that this has
changed her mind on the matter and that she is going to be supporting an
We`re not seeing that kind of movement from Republicans.
WELD: Well, you know, Liz Holtzman, who is a congresswoman on the
committee when I worked for it on the Nixon impeachment, had it absolutely
right. At the beginning, there was a trickle. I think at the time the
first vote was taken there were maybe seven Republican votes for
impeachment but not a majority.
And then when the tapes came out and it showed that Nixon had been lying,
that Barry Goldwater and Carl Curtis went to the White House and Barry
Goldwater said Mr. President, you`ve lied to me for the last time. Your
support in the Senate is zero.
And until that point, there was a clear Republican majority prepared to
hang out to dry for Richard Nixon. Of course, they all lost in next year`s
WELD: – which is what`s going to happen to these Republicans if they
don`t change their tune.
But I agree with Congressman Holtzman. It may not be a torrent at first
but some are going to come and as the facts come out assuming the House
does proceed with an inquiry, which is all the House Judiciary Committee
did with Nixon, they`re just in the middle of an inquiry –
VELSHI: Liz made that point another day, that that`s what it was.
WELD: There was no point in the House to impeach the president but they
unearthed enough facts so nobody could deny it.
VELSHI: So, the interesting thing in this case –
WELD: And that`s what`s going to happen to Trump.
VELSHI: As a former governor, as a former prosecutor, the interesting
thing in this case is not just that it may have happened. It`s the efforts
that the White House and the Department of Justice are going to to ensure
that Congress doesn`t find out the information it needs. That`s – that`s
fishy unto itself.
WELD: Well, that was also the case in Watergate. You know, we subpoenaed
all kinds of documents from the White House and we`d get six copies. Three
of them would have damning information. The other three it would have been
So, we knew they were trying to, you know, stop the investigation by
corrupt means. But the idea that Mr. Trump doing this to favor his own
prospects in the election is anything other than totally corrupt is
ludicrous. It`s the definition of corruption.
VELSHI: Does this – how – what influence do you have on this? Does this
work for you? Are you able to go out there? Do more Republicans say to
you maybe not out loud but maybe they whisper in your ear that this is
WELD: Oh, everyone says to me in private this is nuts, what are we going
to do. And sometimes I say you might stand up and be counted. And they
just say I can`t go there, it`s too great a risk for me. That`s not a
profile in courage.
VELSHI: It is not. Stand by, Governor.
I want to just go to the “Washington Post” reporting that President Trump
told his acting chief of staff, as I mentioned, Mick Mulvaney, to hold back
almost $400 million in military aid for Ukraine at least a week before a
phone call in which Trump is said to have pressured the Ukrainian president
to investigate the son of a political opponent. That`s according to three
senior officials from the administration.
Joining me by phone now is Carol Leonnig, national investigative reporter
for “The Washington Post.”
Carol, the reporting coming out of “The Post” tonight is fast and furious
on this. Congratulations to you and your team for doing it. But it seems
that someone`s talking about the fact that yes, not only did the president
do this but there`s context around it that should make it yet more worrying
CAROL LEONNIG, REPORTER, THE WASHINGTON POST (via telephone): I think –
thank you, Ali. I think what we`re learning is in dribs and drabs what I
assume must be painful for some people in the White House and the Justice
Department, we`re learning day by day more information about the nature of
the president`s interest in Ukraine and his personal effort to reach down
into State and Department of Defense funding and hold it back from the
Ukraine while he was, you know, days away from talking to the president and
according to our sources pressuring the Ukrainian president to investigate
VELSHI: You know, I read to my audience the key paragraph in this story a
couple of times, but I want to go a couple paragraphs lower where it says:
administration officials were instructed to tell lawmakers that the delays
were part of a, quote, interagency process but to give them no additional
information, a pattern that continued for nearly two months until the White
House released the funds on the night of September 11th, 2019.
Now, Carol, this is reporting. So you`re not making – you`re not drawing
conclusions as to what that means.
But that is another layer of this story that is interesting, that it`s not
just that it was delayed. It`s that there was some sort of message crafted
for lawmakers who might wonder why this aid to an ally, particularly an
ally that is fighting off Russian expansionism, was delayed. They would
have legitimate questions about that and it seems not only was the money
delayed but there was a response crafted that might have been less than
LEONNIG: Well, we don`t know what the truth is yet. We don`t know the
full truth yet. We`ve had some administration officials, senior ones,
tonight tell us that basically Trump`s goals were to focus on corruption.
That he was worried whether or not the Ukrainian government was going to
spend the money properly, that it had nothing to do with Zelensky.
The issue, Ali, is really the timing. While on September 9th, the
whistleblower`s complaint is – the Congress is alerted to that complaint.
On the 10th, my understanding is, that Congress is starting to get upset
about why they don`t have the complaint, the nature of it from the director
of national intelligence and the inspector general. And then on the night
of the 11th, our understanding is the aid is released.
It`s just an odd series of dates. It doesn`t – we don`t know exactly what
happened. It`s just interesting.
VELSHI: What`s also interesting is the reporting a little later in the
story that says former National Security Adviser John Bolton wanted to
release the money to Ukraine because he thought it would help the country
while curtailing Russian aggression. But Trump said, as you just
mentioned, he was primarily concerned with corruption. That theme occurs
throughout the story, and it has occurred today several times when Donald
Trump has spoken to media at the United Nations, where he said this is all
He doesn`t seem to have a valid explanation as to why Joe Biden and his son
were brought into the discussion with the Ukrainian president.
LEONNIG: You know, I think in the long run, and I don`t know that this
will answer your question, but in the long run there are a lot of things
that we aren`t fully knowledgeable about yet about this story, and it seems
interesting to me that Biden isn`t particularly thrilled, a candidate for
the Democratic nomination, is not particularly thrilled about discussing
this either and sharing information about what happened with his son, who
didn`t seem to have any real experience in this field and yet was serving
on the board, making a lot of money for a Ukrainian natural gas company.
There`s something that`s not fully transparent about that either.
So, we have to figure out all of those pieces and it`s going to take a
little while for us to get there. What Congress is trying to figure out
now is what was the president`s goal in pressing a Ukrainian president to
investigate Biden at the same time he was pressing his own government to
withhold funding to the Ukraine?
VELSHI: Carol, thank you. Carol Leonnig of “The Washington Post” on a
breaking story that continues to be updated with new information that
Donald Trump ordered a hold on military aid days before calling the
Ukrainian president in this phone call that we`re focused on that is the
subject of so much attention.
Former Massachusetts governor and 2020 presidential candidate Bill Weld
joins me now. We`re going to continue our conversation. Rejoins me I
Given this new information, this new reporting from the “Washington Post,”
Carol Leonnig said what a number of members of Congress have said today.
This could be sorted out with the proper information. If the White House
were to actually hand over the information necessary –
WELD: No, but the cover stories that the White House trotted out to try to
conceal the corrupt intent of Mr. Trump are ludicrous. He was worried
about the end of the fiscal year on September 30th in July?
WELD: He was worried about corruption in a foreign government? Gag me
with a spoon. You know, I pointed out earlier today that treason and
bribery are serious measures and they`re both in the impeachment clause of
the U.S. Constitution. This is the kind of conduct, selling out the United
States and our election, the cornerstone of our democracy, it`s even well
beyond anything the framers of the impeachment clause conceived of –
VELSHI: And there`s no particular history or background with Donald Trump
that this has been an area of his in global concern.
WELD: Foreign corruption?
WELD: The more the better. The more the better. It`s completely
And I pointed out today that treason is serious business. It`s – the
penalty for it under criminal code in a garden variety prosecution is
death. It`s serious business.
That doesn`t mean I`m saying the president should be, you know, beheaded
like Madame Defarge, but it`s serious stuff. And it`s quintessentially the
type of thing the impeachment clause is aimed at. And the only penalty
there is removal.
But as I said earlier today the time has come when we have to remove this
fellow from office just to save the rest of us. If – he`s daring us to
stop him now.
WELD: If we don`t stop him now, we might as well tear up the Constitution
and the Declaration of Independence and submit ourselves to the yoke
because that`s what he has in mind.
He doesn`t want an election. That`s why he`s canceling his primaries. He
says Xi Jinping, no election. What a great –
VELSHI: That`s a good point. You were a victim. They have cancelled –
the Republican Party has gone in with the president.
WELD: That`s a small thing.
WELD: Him being totally corrupt and trying to sell our election and rig it
for his own benefit – and you know if he loses that election he`s going to
say it was rigged against him and try to bring out the military to install
him. He`s all but said that.
He talks about his third term. He knows that`s unconstitutional. He`s
just kind of giving us a tickle there, hoping we look the other way.
VELSHI: Yes, you`re right. Bill Weld, good to see you as always, sir.
Thank you for joining me.
WELD: Thank you, Ali.
All right. We`ve got much more on the breaking news ahead. When we come
back we`ll discuss if President Trump finally crossed the Rubicon with
Republicans. I`m going to ask Rick Wilson and Jennifer Rubin, next.
VELSHI: We`re now entering the second week of news about the allegations
that President Trump may have pressured a foreign government to go after
one of his political rivals and Republicans in Congress continue to remain
largely silent about it. One of a few exceptions came from Utah Senator
Mitt Romney who said this to NBC News` Garrett Haake earlier today.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. MITT ROMNEY (R-UT): The allegations that were made in the - in the
press are quite serious and the question now is what exactly did happen.
GEOFF BENNETT, WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, NBC NEWS: Do you need the
transcript because the President has already admitted that he did have this
conversation with Ukrainians leader and that he did talk about the Bidens
and that he did in effect ask this foreign power to investigate one of his
ROMNEY: He said he spoke - mentioned Vice President Biden`s name but did
not ask for an investigation, he did not say that. He may have, by the way,
I just don`t know whether that was in fact said by the President or not.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
VELSHI: That was Mitt Romney talking to NBC`s Geoff Bennett, not Garrett
Haake. Senator Lisa Murkowski was similarly cautious today, telling Alaska
public media that if the President used his influence to pressure Ukraine,
it would be “very concerning.” Today, Senate Majority Leader Mitch
McConnell broke his silence on the issue, accusing Democrats of
politicizing the whistleblower process in their attempts to shed light on
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. MITCH MCCONNELL, (R-KY) SENATE MAJORITY LEADER: It is regrettable that
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Schiff and Senator Schumer have
chosen to politicize the issue, circumventing the established procedures
and protocols that exist, so the committees can pursue sensitive matters in
the appropriate, deliberate, bipartisan manner.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
VELSHI: All right. When we come back, I`m going to ask conservative
columnist Jennifer Rubin and Republican strategist Rick Wilson what it
means for the Republican Party to remain silent on this issue and how long
they`ll be able to keep it up.
VELSHI: Today, Republican Senator Lindsey Graham told conservative radio
host Hugh Hewitt that America will be blown away by Donald Trump`s
transparency about his phone call with the Ukrainian President, where
President Trump allegedly pressured the foreign leader to investigate one
of his political rivals.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R-SC): I would just urge the president you know he`s
talking openly about the conversation to release as much as possible. I
believe that President Trump is going to blow you away with his willingness
to disclose and be transparent about this phone call because I think he did
nothing wrong and he has nothing to hide. Get ready for some disclosures
from the President that I think will exceed every expectation.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
VELSHI: Getting ready for disclosures from the President that are going to
exceed every expectation, our conservative writer Jennifer Rubin, an
opinion writer at the Washington Post and an MSNBC contributor, also
getting ready to be blown away as Rick Wilson, Republican strategist and a
contributor to The Daily Beast. He`s the author of Everything Trump Touches
Jennifer Rubin, I mean that was - I`m just going to leave you to assess
what Lindsey Graham just said. We`re going to be blown away by the
President`s transparency and all the detail, and it`s going to exceed
expectation. That would be new.
JENNIFER RUBIN, CONTRIBUTOR, MSNBC: Right. And then he`s going to show that
he really was concerned about criminality in other countries and he really
is a do-gooder and on and on and on. This is nonsense, of course. Listen,
one point that I think has to be stressed again and again, of course, they
were talking about Trump`s political opponent because if they were talking
about the general interests of the United States, they would have sent the
Secretary of State, the National Security Advisor, someone who worked for
Trump sent his private attorney to do private business for him and this was
it. Now that we have the other half of it, I think we`re going to have a
daily stream of leaks. I don`t expect many, if any, Republicans to come out
at this stage, but as we get the drip, drip, drip and as we get through the
house process, you`re going to see I think some very nervous Republicans,
because I think what this newest revelation does is it shifts the political
It is now much easier for the Democrats in 2020 to accuse Susan Collins,
for example, of being a toady for a lawless president than it is for her to
defend Trump as the victim of some kind of smear campaign. The same is true
of Thom Tillis; the same is true of Cory Gardner. So the political
incentive now for Republicans to flee is beginning to equalize their
aversion to fleeing before.
So, I wouldn`t be surprised if you start seeing more and more little
cracks. We saw a little tiny crack with Mitt Romney, but–
VELSHI: Little tiny? There was a lot of qualification there. There was a
lot of if-ing, if it happened; Lisa Murkowski, if it happened, if it`s
RUBIN: Right. But, you know, let him put out the transcript.
RUBIN: But more importantly, let them put out the complaint - the
RUBIN: Because that has more information arguably than just this one phone
conversation. It apparently describes a whole pattern of behavior.
VELSHI: Rick Wilson, I called you a Republican strategist. Are you still a
RICK WILSON, POLITICAL CONSULTANT: Not anymore. I mean look, there`s no
Republican Party left; there`s only Donald Trump`s party and it`s a party
today that has a bunch of people who used to be Republicans, who are now
having a competition to see which one can lick Donald`s boots and give them
the highest shine every day. But, I think what we`re really looking at
here, I think Jennifer is right, there is some nervousness building now and
there are guys who are actually cracking the old Wikipedia and looking back
at what happened during Watergate.
1973, the Republican Party was screaming that it was a fake news conspiracy
by the liberal media against Richard Nixon. 1974, 49 House members and
eight Senate members lost their seats. So, I think they`re starting to
realize that maybe this guy, who was a reckless day-trading, showed (ph)
finally, like - I got out over his skis to the point where it`s going to
drag a lot more of them down with him.
VELSHI: So the reason I asked you the question is because on Meet the
Press, we`ve got a lot of information about what happened. I fully agree
that one doesn`t want to make decisions based on half the information and
it would be very simple, Rick, for the White House or the Justice
Department to not prevent Congress from getting the necessary information
and as Jennifer says, the whistleblower complaint.
VELSHI: But, Chuck Todd was talking to Pennsylvania Senator Republican Pat
Toomey. Let`s just listen to what his response was.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. PAT TOOMEY (R-PA): I don`t know what the conversation was.
CHUCK TODD, MODERATOR, NBC: I just told you. He said he did bring up
corruption in Biden.
TOOMEY: It could be spun that way.
TODD: I mean was that appropriate in any level?
TOOMEY: Yes, and again, I don`t know the context; I don`t know what was
said. Look, it is not appropriate for any candidate for federal office,
certainly, including a sitting president, to ask for assistance from a
foreign country. That`s not appropriate. But, I don`t know that that`s what
(END VIDEO CLIP)
VELSHI: How long does that go on for and how well does that work, Rick?
WILSON: Ali, I mean the big thing here is these guys are a whole bunch of
profiles in Chicken Blank right now because all of them are terrified that
Donald Trump is going to tweet at them. They`re terrified he`s going to
send up a mean video, like he did with Mitt Romney tonight, a man who is
demonstrably his better in every possible respect, and they`re still living
in fear of this guy and they`re willing to sacrifice their integrity and
their political lives in order to not have him be mad at them.
This is a cult that is governed by terror. So, it`s going to last until
they start seeing their numbers take big hits. It`s going to last until
they start seeing that their polling is influenced by him. They should have
known already. They lost 42 House members last time. They beat themselves
on the chest saying, “We kept the Senate.” Well, big deal; you lost 42
House members, about 350 other elected officials around the country. Donald
Trump is a political cancer who is going to devour all of them.
VELSHI: Jennifer Rubin from an entirely different perspective, there are a
lot of Republicans, particularly men of a certain age like Lindsey Graham,
who should perhaps be more concerned with the fact that we were dangling
taking away military aid from a country that is the front line in a battle
with a Russia that is looking to spread itself as far as it will go.
There`s a military, NATO, world peace component to this.
RUBIN: Right, the old Lindsey Graham who was a friend of the dear late John
McCain would have been outraged by this.
RUBIN: Because, as you say, Ukraine is on the front lines. They`re already
being occupied in part by Russia. They are an ally of ours. This whole
hullabaloo with Ukraine started when the West was attempting simply to
establish trade and economic relations with Ukraine, which the Russians
wanted no part of.
So yes, this has put our national security interests behind, “Oh, wow,
again Donald Trump`s personal interests,” and when you pile this on top of
all the other instances in which he has put his personal interests ahead of
public interest, whether it`s escorting people to his hotels so he can
advertise them, or whether it`s some other act of public policy, this is a
guy who is going to look after himself. We thought he was somehow in
Putin`s debt. No, he`s willing to switch sides. He`s not even loyal to
Putin anymore. He`ll take any help from anybody he can get.
So, I think the Republicans are going to start running out of excuses as
more and more of this comes out. What happens to Pat Toomey when the
transcript comes out, when this whistleblower complaint comes out? Are they
still going to stand behind him? Are they going to say, “Well, it doesn`t
say quid pro quo or it doesn`t say specifically Biden`s name.” There`s
going to be very little running room for these people to use and eventually
it`s going to be closing in on them. And you know who else it is closing in
on, Mr. Pence, Mr. Pompeo, anyone who is in his circle in foreign policy,
anyone who met with the Ukrainian President recently.
RUBIN: What about the Head of OMB, Mick Mulvaney.
VELSHI: Mick Mulvaney, who is the one who`ve sent the message.
RUBIN: He apparently carried the message, the message about holding back
VELSHI: Yes, the money and not being forthcoming perhaps with lawmakers
about why the money was being withheld–
RUBIN: Correct. So, all of these people–
VELSHI: –using the excuse that it was about foreign corruption.
WILSON: Yes, I think that - I think that nudges us quite a bit more into
sort of a conspiracy frame where you`ve got a very loyal hatchet man–
WILSON: –of Donald Trump who is willing to do something the State
Department didn`t want to do and DoD didn`t want to do. But, Mick Mulvaney
went and found a shortcut through OMB, so that Donald Trump would have the
predicate in his extortion call to the Ukrainians.
WILSON: The money is on hold, too bad.
VELSHI: Mick Mulvaney was a tea party Republican who was all about
accountability, who was all about Washington being run by a bunch of people
who didn`t under - who did not have–
WILSON: Of course.
VELSHI: Who did not believe in Congress`s authority to go to suggest that
you`ll lie to Congress, you`ll lie to Congress members to do someone`s
bidding because Donald Trump, your boss, is somehow very, very concerned
with corruption in the developed - in developing world or in the - in
VELSHI: That one`s interesting to me.
WILSON: Oh, yes. The transformation of Mick Mulvaney is one of the people
that is the most marked in this entire process. He was a guy who went from
being a constitutional conservative–
WILSON: –to being Mr. Trump, does your car have a high enough wax shine on
it this morning. So, it`s a real disappointment to watch what has happened
to him, but it`s going to get worse before it gets better.
VELSHI: Jennifer Rubin, Rick Wilson, thanks for joining me tonight.
More breaking news as the tide continues to turn on impeachment. The count
of Democrats who are now for impeachment is growing, seems with every hour.
VELSHI: Yet more breaking news tonight. Democratic Congresswoman Veronica
Escobar of Texas has just announced her support for impeachment. She had
previously said that she`d support an impeachment inquiry, now she has
moved a step further in light of the new reporting from the Washington Post
that President Trump reportedly ordered a hold on military aid just days
before calling the President of Ukraine.
Congresswoman Escobar tweeted “The corruption of this administration has no
bottom. From using the Oval Office for self-enrichment to welcoming foreign
interference in our elections twice, the level of lawlessness is
staggering. Our democracy needs defending now more than ever. I am ready to
impeach.” Congresswoman Escobar is a member of the House Judiciary
Committee. When we come back, I`ll talk to a former top Democratic aid
about the state of impeachment tonight and what might come out of the House
Democratic caucus meeting tomorrow.
VELSHI: Joining us now, Jennifer Palmieri, former White House
communications director for President Obama, former communications director
for Hillary Clinton`s Presidential campaign. Jennifer, we booked you to
talk a little while ago but more has happened since.
The flurry of Democrats who are calling now for an impeachment inquiry or,
in the case of Veronica Escobar of Texas, impeachment itself. This new
reporting from the Washington Post that seems to bring a whole lot more
people into this web of whatever happened between President Trump and the
President of Ukraine. What is your take on it at this hour?
JENNIFER PALMIERI, FORMER WHITE HOUSE COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR FOR PRESIDENT
OBAMA: It seems to be a watershed moment and I think for a few reasons.
Prior to this, anything having to do with the Mueller Report because it was
grounded in the 2016 campaign, I think that it came with some political
discounting. But this is something very different and this is worse than
Watergate. In Watergate, the RNC had some folks break into the Democratic
Party headquarters to spy on them.
This is taking - this is thwarting the will of Congress. This is taking
$400 million that was appropriated by the Congress to be used to aid
Ukraine and trying to leverage that for Donald Trump`s personal political
gain and doing that in real time. So, I think that is why it is a very
grave situation. It doesn`t have anything to do with 2016. And it is - just
feels like a very different moment.
I`ve talked to a lot of folks on the Hill today and I know you`ve seen some
people come out–
PALMIERI: –now that are going to support impeachment. They have their
PALMIERI: I think Thursday is going to be a big day where they - when the
DNI comes up to testify and you may see more happen, more members jump to
that line - to the impeachment line up.
VELSHI: Well, that is an interesting point. So, the acting DNI Maguire and
the Inspector General where this complaint - this whistleblower complaint
was lodged will appear before the Senate Intelligence Committee now behind
closed doors on Thursday afternoon. They are also going to appear before
the House Intelligence Committee for an open hearing earlier that day.
I just spoke to Debbie Dingell a few minutes ago from Michigan and she said
- announced on this show that she is now - she said, we have no choice but
to launch an investigation that is going to give us the facts. And I asked
for clarity on that and she did say that means an impeachment
investigation. But, everybody like Debbie Dingell who remembers Watergate,
like Bill Weld who was on with me who remembers Watergate, like Elizabeth
Holtzman, they all say the same thing that the impeachment inquiry is what
did it in Watergate. It wasn`t a House vote. But they - people needed to
hear the story. They needed to hear the evidence.
VELSHI: They needed to hear what actually happened. And it changed things.
PALMIERI: It does. Once you lay that all, once you start to lay it all out
in the form of a hearing in front of the Congress and the public can hear
all of the evidence that`s mounted, it has an impact. And that is why I
think the House should move forward with this and why I discount the view
that it would be a mistake for the House to impeach the President because
we all believe–
PALMIERI: –that the Senate won`t act on it or that the Senate won`t quit
him. We have no idea what the Senate willing to do.
PALMIERI: We don`t know what they will do once these facts are put into
public record, once the House votes on it.
PALMIERI: You just can`t guess at that.
VELSHI: This becomes a hard thing to not take seriously and explain that to
your constituents. Jennifer, thank you for being with us, Jennifer
Palmieri. That is tonight`s LAST WORD. “THE 11TH HOUR” with Brian Williams
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