Show: ALL IN with CHRIS HAYES Date: April 18, 2017 Guest: Richard Painter, Rick Wilson, Saru Jayaraman, Michelle Goldberg CHRIS MATTHEWS, MSNBC HARDBALL HOST: He`s afraid what will look like tonight people don`t like him. And that`s HARDBALL for now, thanks for being with us. "ALL IN" with Chris Hayes starts right now.
CHRIS HAYES, MSNBC ALL IN HOST: Tonight on ALL IN.
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: I have a little conflict of interest because I have a major, major building in Istanbul.
HAYES: A Presidential conflict of interest in the President`s own words.
TRUMP: I have a major, major building in Istanbul.
HAYES: Tonight, the jaw-dropping story of the President`s support for a Turkish strongman, and why it`s a conflict of interest smoking gun.
Then as polls close in Georgia -
TRUMP: Hello, this is President Donald Trump.
HAYES: Could the President`s last-minute entry into tonight`s big special election backfire?
HAYES: Plus Tom Perez and Senator Bernie Sanders on their tour to turn red states blue.
BERNIE SANDERS, UNITED STATES SENATOR FROM VERMONT: Our job is to radically transform the democratic party.
HAYES: And as the protests continue and another woman speaks out, new reporting that Fox News is finally turning on Bill O`Reilly.
BILL O`REILLY, FOX NEWS TV HOST: Caution.
HAYES: When ALL IN starts right now.
Good evening from New York, I`m Chris Hayes. Everything is happening tonight. It seems an incredibly busy night of news. The polls are now closed in the special election that is the first real test case to see how powerful the resistance to Donald Trump can be. We will be going to Georgia and bringing you the results as we get them. But first, tonight the White House is attempting to contain a budding conflict of interest controversy of the first order. At first glance, it made no sense. Why would President Trump place a phone call to Turkish President Recep Erdogan to congratulate Erdogan for winning a heavily disputed referendum that will greatly expand his power while, many experts say, effectively putting an end to democracy in Turkey? America, after all, likes to think of itself as a defender of democracy, at least in word if not always in deed. And even before the referendum, Erdogan had looked increasingly like an autocrat. His government under a seemingly perpetual state of emergency, his record of throwing dissidents and journalists in jail, leaving much of the world aghast. The U.S. State Department sure seemed concerned, releasing a statement noting election regularities and urging the government of Turkey to protect the fundamental rights and freedoms of all citizens while insisting that commitment to the rule of law and a diverse and free media remains essential. House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Edward Royce cast the referendum as a sign of Turkey`s creeping authoritarianism, saying that all who value democracy - this is a republican - pluralism and Turkey`s key role in the region should be concerned about the elimination of important checks and balances in the Turkish system. Yet President Trump, the leader of the free world as we like to say, went out of his way to call Erdogan, to pat him on the back for consolidating power in a completely unnecessary and unforced departure from American foreign policy and American values. Not a wink and a nod for an autocrat we were allied with, but a full, hearty Atta-boy. It looks absolutely bewildering until you hear this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: I have a little conflict of interest because I have a major, major building in Istanbul. And it`s a tremendously successful job. It`s called Trump towers, two towers instead of one. Not the usual one. It`s two.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: That was Trump in December 2015 in a Breitbart interview with none other than Steve Bannon, explicitly stating he has a conflict of interest in Turkey. Straight from the horse`s mouth. Throughout the campaign and into the Presidency, we`ve talked in hypothetical terms about the danger posed by having a President who refuses to separate himself from his sprawling worldwide business interests. We no longer need to talk in terms of hypotheticals. This is what that looks like. It looks like the President propping up an autocrat antithetical to American values, a man who in that same 2015 interview Trump suggested was allied with ISIS terrorists.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: So we have a very complex set of circumstances and if you look at Turkey, turkey looks like they`re on the side of ISIS more or less based on the oil.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: Erdogan himself presided over the opening ceremonies for the Trump towers in Istanbul in 2012 and met with Trump at the time. Ivanka Trump tweeting afterward, quote, "thank you, Prime Minister Erdogan, for joining us yesterday to celebrate the launch of #trumptowersistanbul." Last year, after the President proposed banning Muslims from the United States, Erdogan declared that Trump has no tolerance for Muslims in America, and he called the Istanbul towers to lose Trump`s name, which would be a blow of course to the Trump organization. In the wake of yesterday`s call, that`s probably no longer so much of a concern. The Trump administration defended the call today, insisting the bigger point and priority of Trump`s call was to talk about shared interests with a longstanding NATO ally. Yet Trump has given us no reason to dismiss fears that he is using the full force and power of the Presidency to enrich himself and his family. The fears that arise when a President refuses to divest himself from his businesses, refuses to release his tax returns so we can even know what it is he owns, and how it might affect how he wields power. In the wake of yesterday`s call, every citizen now has to ask, did the President of the United States go out of his way to lend our nation`s imprimatur to a power grab by a rising authoritarian who he said was aligned with ISIS because the President wanted to protect his own bottom line? Joining me now, Richard Painter, who was Chief White House Ethics Lawyer under George W. Bush and Republican Political Strategist and Columnist Rick Wilson. And Mr. Painter, I`ll start with you. I mean, Trump was very forthcoming about this in that interview. He said, "I have a conflict of interest." It sure looks like one.
RICHARD PAINTER, GEORGE W. BUSH FORMER CHIEF WHITE HOUSE ETHICS LAWYER: Well, it certainly is. He stands to make a lot of money over there in Turkey and elsewhere around the world. And he doesn`t care if that means that he`s going to be accommodating a totalitarian government, the authoritarian style that we see taking over in Turkey. It actually might be very pleasing to him and to Steve Bannon and some of the people who work for President Trump. But bottom line is, he`s focused on increasing his bottom line. He`s not focusing on the American interests in Turkey or anywhere else, and this is a very dangerous situation because we see dictators rising not just in Turkey but the Philippines and in many other countries, and all the President of the United States cares about is his own business interests and his own conflicts of interest, enriching his family. We see all the trademarks coming in from China, not just for the President but for Ivanka, and that seems to be all they care about. And I`m wondering where are we accommodating and helping serve the interests of the American people? That`s not happening, and this is a very dangerous world, that I`m very worried about how this administration is dealing with it.
HAYES: Rick, you know, this - I - when I saw the news last night about this phone call, it was originally reported in Turkey first of course. I thought to myself, wow, that is a really strange decision. I mean there`s a lot of ways you can play this. And if he had been asked at an availability about it and he said, oh, I like Erdogan, but this was an affirmative decision to do something that I think left all of our allies scratching their heads, particularly across Europe. This was widely condemned, this referendum widely seen.
RICK WILSON, REPUBLICAN POLITICAL STRATEGIST AND COLUMNIST: Right.
HAYES: And then you go back and you listen to the interview and you look at the tweet and you think to yourself, well, that seems like an (INAUDIBLE) plausible explanation for it, and that is deeply unnerving. This is what it looks like.
WILSON: I mean, Chris, I think there are two equally disturbing possibilities here. The first is, he`s doing this to protect his fiscal interest, his financial interest in Turkey. The second is that he`s a fanboy for authoritarians.
WILSON: And the fact of the matter, this referendum rolled back the basic infrastructures of democracy in Turkey quite a long way, making Erdogan into one of the most powerful political leaders in the world in terms of the executive power he`s taken by this referendum. It is a really touchy situation, I think, in terms of Turkey being a participating member in NATO and in the European Community, et cetera, because it is basically become now -- he`s basically in some sort of a central Asian strongman figure. And I think maybe Trump does love that a little bit, but I also think that he never takes his eye off the family business. And Trump wants to monetize the Oval Office, the guarantee you, the first thing he thought of was not has Turkey lost most of his fundamental democratic freedoms, but how am I going to profit or loss on this thing?
HAYES: And Richard, obviously we don`t have the tax returns. The President continues to stonewall on that front, but we don`t even know what the level of financial enrichment or exposure here is in this case, right? I mean, there is - could be a flow of income coming actively from that franchise, from the way that deal is structured in Turkey, and we just don`t know.
PAINTER: Well, we know that it`s a lot. We don`t know exactly how much. We don`t know all the details, but we know that he has substantial financial interests in Turkey, in the Philippines, and many other countries. And this is a dangerous situation. This is what happened in the 1930s, when we had the rise of dictators in Europe, and many American business people had substantial financial interests in Germany and other countries. But at least President Roosevelt didn`t. And this is a very bad situation when a President refuses to divest of his international holdings. He`s beholden to foreign dictators, foreign oligarchs, and we`re going to have American soldiers could easily get trapped into situations abroad simply because he wants to defend his financial interests. We need the President to divest himself of these conflicts of interest now and also to abide by the constitution because it is unconstitutional for him to receive any benefit s and payments from foreign governments, and that could be going on right now in Turkey and elsewhere.
PAINTER: We know it is with respect to the bank of China. I mean this is a very bad situation right now.
HAYES: Rick, I wonder if there`s a trip wire here with republicans in the House. I thought it was interesting the foreign affairs - foreign services - sorry, Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman basically, you know, had the position that I think most people had on this referendum. If there`s - if there`s - if there - you`re going to see pushback from republicans on this.
WILSON: Chris, Donald Trump could receive briefcases full of blood-soaked cash at the White House from foreign dictators, and the House republicans right now will go, "not a big deal." They do not - they absolutely divorced themselves from holding him to account for anything.
HAYES: Richard Painter and Rick Wilson, thanks to you both. Appreciate it.
PAINTER: Thank you.
HAYES: We are now 89 days into this administration. You can barely catalogue the conflicts of interest at play as Mr. Painter alluded to. In fact, you can`t actually do it because on this tax day, the President still refuses to release his tax returns. But the conflicts are just about everywhere you look. Today, the President signed an executive order to clamp down on guest worker visas specifically targeting the H-1B Visa program while exempting crucially the H-2B Seasonal Worker Visa that Trump himself uses to staff his Mar-a-Lago resort. Also today, the Associated Press reported that on the very day Ivanka Trump had dinner with the President of China earlier this month, Ivanka Trump`s company won provisional approval from the Chinese government for three new trademarks. And then there`s the lawsuit against the President for violating the constitutions emoluments clause barring U.S. office holders from accepting gifts from foreign powers. The suit first filed in January, centred on what goes on at Trump`s hotels and restaurants, including the Trump International Hotel in Washington D.C. And today the suit got two new plaintiffs including the organization led by my next guest, Saru Jayaraman, Co-Founder and Co-Director of the Restaurant Opportunities Centers United. Tell me, Saru, the theory of the case. What are you - why are you suing the President?
SARU JAYARAMAN, RESTAURANT OPPORTUNITIES CENTER UNITED CO-FOUNDER: So the theory of the case is that the President has violated, as you said, the emoluments clause, which says, as Richard Painter said, that the President cannot accept gifts of any kind or, in this case, business even from foreign dignitaries, from Prime Ministers, Presidents, First Ladies. And in this case, President Trump owns hotels and restaurants, many of them all over America. And there is a conflict of interest because foreign dignitaries, ambassadors, prime ministers, presidents will feel like they should or, you know, feel compelled to stay at or consume at the restaurants in these hotels in order to curry favor with the President, in order to move policy, in order to get trade deals.
JAYARAMAN: And that is a direct harm to our members. We represent 25,000 workers, over 200 restaurant owners, and several thousand consumers who will lose business, especially the restaurant owners and workers who will lose business as they have to compete now with the President of the United States.
HAYES: So - I see. So a lot of people have said there`s a standing problem here, right? Which is that who has standing to sue the President for the violation, and who can show a tangible harm? And what you`re saying is, your organization represents both owners and workers at restaurants that are non-Trump restaurants -
JAYARAMAN: That`s right.
HAYES: - are (INAUDIBLE) tangibly going to be harmed by an inflow of foreign dollars into Trump-owned properties in order to curry favor with the President.
JAYARAMAN: That`s right. We`ve got a number of employers in New York, in Washington, D.C., in Chicago, in Florida who receive foreign dignitaries as customers all the time. And now they`re going to have to compete with the President of the United States when these foreign dignitaries really feel like they really should be eating at Trump restaurants - Trump and restaurants and Trump hotels instead of the restaurants they`ve been eating at, which belong to the members of our organization. So they will lose income. The workers in these restaurants will lose tips, will lose income themselves. There is direct harm as a result - to our members as a result of this incredible conflict of interest and violation of the constitution. Look, it`s hard enough in our industry. Workers receive the lowest wages in our industry of almost any industry. Tipped workers get a minimum wage of $2.13 an hour. They rely on these tips and now they`re having to compete with the President of the United States and having to lose business in terms of foreign dignitaries to Trump hotels and restaurants, it`s just outrageous.
HAYES: It`s a very clear-cut articulation of harm there. We`ll see what the courts make of it. I`ve heard a lot of legal observers who think you guys have a good case to make. Saru Jayaraman, thank you very much.
JAYARAMAN: We think so to. Thank you.
HAYES: Thanks for being with me. All right. Still to come, DNC Chair Tom Perez and Senatir Bernie Sanders join me exclusively for the first time together to talk about their red state road show, selling the democratic party back to their own base.
Meanwhile, we are awaiting the results of the Georgia special election. Polls have closed there, and democrats are hoping to shock the world by stealing a congressional seat. Can they pull it off? We`ll talk about that after this two-minute break.
HAYES: A little more than an hour ago, polls closed in the most talked about House race in a long, long time. Where a democrat has more than a fighting chance of winning a seat that hasn`t gone blue since Jimmy Carter was in the White House. 30-year-old Jon Ossoff is leading in the most recent polls where he`s been consistently in the low to mid-40s, which is more than 20 points ahead of the closest republican but short of the 50 percent. Ossoff needs to win this thing outright and avoid a runoff election in June. Meanwhile, keeping Ossoff below the 50 percent threshold wasn`t the only challenge facing the republican field today. They also need to figure out a way to distance themselves from Donald Trump, particularly in a very affluent, well-educated district. Fact as the New York Times pointed out, it`s the best educated House district held by a republican in the country, and its republican voters in exactly this kind of district who seemed to be the most turned off by Trump. For instance, in 2012, Mitt Romney carried the district by whopping 23 percentage points. Five months ago, Trump barely squeaked by. So, if you thought that Trump would stay away from this race, keep his name out of it, you would of course be wrong. In the last three days, Trump has tweeted about the race six times. And then, there`s this Robocall.
(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)
TRUMP: Hello. This is President Donald Trump. Liberal democrats from outside of Georgia are spending millions and millions of dollars trying to take your republican congressional seat away from you. Don`t let them do it. Tomorrow there`s a special election for Congress in Georgia. Only you can stop the super liberal democrats and Nancy Pelosi`s group and, in particular, Jon Ossoff.
(END AUDIO CLIP)
HAYES: Joining me now, Michelle Goldberg, Columnist for Slate who`s in Atlanta covering the race. Michelle, we talked to you last night, today was election day. What did you see?
MICHELLE GOLDBERG, SLATE COLUMNIST: You know, I think - it`s really hard to extrapolate from - you know, the kind of - a number of polling places that you can hit during a day - during the day, but turnout is definitely really high. I went to one polling place in particular where people were waiting in line for an hour, and people told me that the turnout would seemed to be at that polling place even higher than it had been for the Presidential election. I don`t think that`s true across the board, but you know, at this point, nobody knows. There`s no model for an election like this. And so, I think that they`re probably on track when I spoke to the Ossoff campaign to get about a third of the total vote that they got in the Presidential election. But who those voters are, just nobody knows.
HAYES: The Trump entrance in the race is really interesting to me because -
HAYES: - you know, I`ve been watching the republicans, particularly Karen Handel, who is a known quantity there. She said - run for state-wide office before. Tying themselves in knots trying to kind of distance themselves from the President. It`s the kind of race that you think you`d lay low, but he`s definitely just thrown himself in.
GOLDBERG: Well, and I think that he understands that whatever happens tonight, this is a referendum on Donald Trump. And if the most - the result that`s the most expected is that you have Ossoff way ahead and then Karen Handel in second place, which means that in essence you have two anti-Trump candidates coming out on top with the kind of candidate who has tried the hardest to tie himself to Trump, Bob Gray, being - coming in third. And so, you know, I don`t think - I think that Donald Trump in as much as he`s interested in this race, it`s not because of how it`s going to affect the republican party at large. It`s because of what it says about him.
HAYES: And that point about (INAUDIBLE) handle is an important one. There`s sort of two front runners for that sort of second spot in this - what they call jungle primary. And Gray has been the Trumpian candidate, the make America great again candidate. Handel has been the kind of anti- Trump republican, right?
HAYES: And so -
GOLDBERG: Well, although it`s a little mixed.
GOLDBERG: I feel like it`s a little bit confused because on the one hand, she`ll say that she plans to work - to work with Donald Trump, and there`s, you know, Gray will hit her for not being pro-Trump enough, although it`s not clear that that`s an attack with any kind of purchase in a district where Trump`s favourability is either even or very, very slightly ahead. But, you know, certainly below his favourability with republicans in the country at large.
HAYES: Right. And do you think - I mean there`s then the question if we do get this runoff, right, it`s like can Ossoff - like can the energy be sustained? Can the motivation be sustained? Can Ossoff sustain what is going to be an absolute avalanche of money pouring into a district that`s already seen millions and millions and millions and millions of dollars pour in for a special election?
GOLDBERG: So there`s already an avalanche of money pouring in. I mean, people pay a lot of attention to the fact that he`s raised all this outside money, but there is so much money - dark money pouring in to hit him with negative ads. And so, you know, certainly I think his volunteers, you just cannot overstate how passionate, borderline fanatical the women - and they`re mostly women who are volunteering to try to give him a victory and make a statement of their horror at the election of Donald Trump. I mean they are indefatigable. And so, I don`t see them giving - you know, maybe they`ll sleep in for a couple days, but I don`t see them giving up if Ossoff doesn`t make it tonight.
HAYES: All right. Michelle Goldberg, down there in Georgia Sixth. The eyes of the world on Georgia Sixth, the Atlanta suburbs there. We`re going to have more updates if we hear them throughout the rest of the night. Thank you Michelle.
GOLDBERG: Thanks a lot.
HAYES: Still ahead, the rebirth of the 50-state strategy. DNC Chair Tom Perez and Senator Bernie Sanders on their national tour to turn red states blue. That story coming up.
HAYES: The President visited Kenosha, Wisconsin, today to sign an executive order enforcing laws already on the books. Those laws require the federal government where possible to buy products made in the U.S. The order does not apply to products sold by the President`s own company, of course, many of which are imported from around the world. In rural Iowa today, in a Town Hall hosted by Republican Senator Joni Ernst, a constituent asked about the President`s contradictory stance.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Your President talks about bringing jobs back to America, buy America, make America. Shouldn`t he be the first one to bring his company back and manufacture his products here, his daughter to bring her companies back, manufacture here rather than importing materials?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: He also asked about the President`s trips to his resort in Palm Beach, where he has now spent most of his weekends since taking office.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What`s your feelings on that and the President spending weekends in Florida, costing us $3 million-plus for - in 100 days?
JONI ERNST, UNITED STATES SENATOR FROM IOWA: You bet. I agree with you, Doug. I agree on both points. I do think we need to bring manufacturing back to the United States, and I would love to see that. And, you know, maybe he puts his money where his mouth is and brings some of those jobs here. With the trips to Florida, I do wish that he would spend more time in Washington, D.C. That`s what we have the White House for. We would love to see more of those State Department visits in Washington, D.C. That is something I think that has been - has been bothering not just me but some other members of our caucus. So I think that is going to be a topic of discussion that we have when we get back to Washington, D.C.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: Republican lawmakers are not the only ones talking to constituents around the country. Senator Bernie Sanders and DNC Chair Tom Perez are teaming up on a cross country tour of red and purple state. Their first interview ever together coming up next.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SANDERS: Our job is to bring millions of people into the political process. Our job is to radically transform the democratic party. And when we are united, we are strongest as a party, as a nation, as a resistance movement.
whether you are a Republican in this room, a Democrat, an independent, I am here to say thank you for being part of the resistance.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: Senator Bernie Sanders and DNC chair Tom Perez kicked off a nine- state tour in Maine last night. And they join me now from Louisville, Kentucky.
It`s great to have you both. Senator, let me start with you. You know, your relationship to the Democratic Party is an interesting one. You`ve sort of famously been an independent. You registered as a Democrat. You ran the primary. You went back to being independent.
SANDERS: No. Chris, in Vermont, we don`t have party registration.
HAYES: OK, I`m sorry.
SANDERS: What you do do is take your ballot in the Democratic primary, which I do.
So I guess my question to you is do you -- you`ve been talking - you`re on this road trip now with the head of the DNC. You`re talking about reforming, reviving, transforming the Democratic Party. Do you consider yourself a Democrat?
SANDERS: No. I`m an independent. And I think if the Democratic Party is going to succeed -- and I want to see it succeed -- it`s going to have to open its doors to independents who are probably - there are probably more independents in this country than either Democrats or Republicans. And it`s got to open its doors to working people and to young people and create a grassroots party, that`s what we need.
And what the party has got to focus on are the most important issues facing working people - that`s the decline of the middle class, that`s the need to take on the billionaire class and Wall Street and the insurance companies and bring people together, a, against Trump`s absolutely reactionary agenda, and, b, fight for a progressive agenda which, among other things, includes a Medicare for all single-payer program.
HAYES: Is the DNC on board with Medicare with all single-payer, Tom?
PEREZ: You know, we want to make sure that health care is a right, it`s not a privilege. And that`s why we fought for the Affordable Care Act. That`s why we want to continue to expand it. We want to make sure that everybody - and the Affordable Care Act has made tremendous progress. We have more work to do.
And I think the unity, Chris, that we`ve shown in the recent efforts by Trump to repeal the Affordable Care Act have been an energizing force for Democrats, independents, others who share the values of inclusion and opportunity. And health care is absolutely a right in this country, or should be. It shouldn`t be a privilege. And obviously we believe that as Democrats. Republicans don`t appear to believe that.
HAYES: You know, it`s interesting you mention that because the AHCA fight was very unifying, And as I sort of surveyed the political landscape, you had everyone from sort of real lefties, avowed socialists and folks who were fighting in that fight, people all the way much more towards the center, that whole spectrum was engaged in that fight.
And, Tom, I saw you speak last night in Maine, I believe it was. And you`re talking to people in a lot of cases who there`s a significant part of the party who feels like you were a stalking horse for the establishment, that you`re there to sort of put down the Bernie Sanders wing of the party. You represent the one faction in this battle. People booed you. What is your message to those folks who are skeptical, particularly of you and what your leadership represents there?
PEREZ: Well, we had a I thought we had a very good day yesterday, Chris. And the reason we have a good day is we have shared values. You know, we all believe that America works best when everyone has a chance to succeed, when we have shared prosperity, not just prosperity for a few. I believe that anyone who works a full-time job should make a livable wage and live a middle class life. That`s what the Democratic Party believes. We believe in access to higher education. Those are our values.
And when we put those values into action, that`s when we do well as Democrats.
HAYES: Senator Sanders, here`s where I think the rubber hits the road on this, right. So, the idea of sort of opportunity is great and these sort of core economic messages. But part of what worked for Trump -- and he`s in Kenosha today, it`s a place we did a town hall. I was there with you, senator.
Part of what worked there was something much more hard edged. It was a much more populist rhetoric about people are screwing you, and I`m going to bring back jobs to this country, right? And he`s there doing this buy American, hire American. That is a more pointed message, and it worked with people. And my question is, senator, to you, what is the pointed response to that?
SANDERS: Well, what I think, Chris, is that people understand that there is a reason why the middle class is shrinking and why we have 43 million people living in poverty. And why, at the same time, the wealthiest people in this country are doing phenomenally well. In the last 17 years, we`ve seen an explosion, ten times increase in the number of billionaires.
And what the American people understand that we can`t bring about the changes that we want -- health care for all, making public colleges and universities tuition-free, transforming our energy system away from fossil fuel, unless we have the guts to point the finger at the ruling class of this country.
SANDERS: The billionaire class and Wall Street and say, you know what? Your greed is destroying this country. And you know what? We`re going to take you on.
And I think when you make that statement, a lot of people start nodding their heads and they say, yeah, that`s what we got to do.
HAYES: See, this is what`s key to me. And Tom, I want to hear you talk about this because when Bernie -- senator, when you talk about this, there`s a bad guy there. There`s a villain in the story. There are people that are doing wrong by the American people.
Donald Trump is a story where he`s got villains as well, and they`re different folks, sometimes they`re corporations, mostly they`re immigrants and other people. What is the -- do you see the world that way, Tom? Is that the Democratic message? Do you think it`s important, as the senator sitting next to you just said, to say the ruling class -- his words -- of this country are basically screwing average folks?
PEREZ: Listen, you know, when we put hope on the ballot, Chris, we win. When we allow our opponents to put fear on the ballot, we don`t do so well. I believe.
HAYES: Tom, Tom, Tom -- Hillary Clinton -- this is my point. Hillary Clinton ran on hope. She ran on hope. It was a very hopeful message. And the point is do you have to name the enemy? That`s my question. Do you have to say, these are the people that are screwing you?
PEREZ: Well, listen, I don`t -- I think you`re creating a false choice, Chris. What we have to do as Democrats is to articulate very clearly that Donald Trump`s vision for America is a vision for the top 1 percent of the 1 percent. It`s a vision that`s divisive. When he talks about the making America executive order, if you turn over the sheet on that executive order, it probably says made in China.
You`ve got 50 pallets or so of Ivanka`s stuff that`s come into the United States from China and Singapore since roughly the 1st of the year.
So part of what we have to do is expose the fraud of Donald Trump. He keeps talking about how he`s going to make your life better. He`s going to bring jobs back to America, and then you look at what`s happening in reality. He`s making it harder for first-time home buyers to buy a home. He`s still making all his products in Mexico, China, and elsewhere, or almost all of his products. And so we talk about that, Chris.
But then we also have to talk our affirmative vision. I believe that America works best when everybody shares in that prosperity, and so we have to do both.
HAYES: You`re out on the road. You`re talking to people. And I`ll ask you both this. I`ll start with you, Tom. You`re talking to people in places. You`re in Kentucky, which I think is really an interesting choice. You`re in Maine. You`re going to go to Nevada. What are you hearing? What are you learning? This is what I want to know. Everyone comes with preconceptions. When you`re hearing, talking to people in these places, tell me one thing you`ve learned, that you`re learning in doing this job and going around talking to people?
PEREZ: The people of Kentucky, the people of Maine, the people everywhere I go are incredibly resilient people. They want to hear the message of the Democratic Party. They want to hear that optimistic message of inclusion. How are we going to make their lives better? How are we going to do what Ted Kennedy taught me, which is to help the common man and the common woman to get that security for them and their family and their children and grandchildren? And that`s what they want. There`s incredible energy out here, and when we put our values out there and tell them clearly what we`re fighting for, we`re fighting for them.
HAYES: What about you, senator? Do you agree with that?
SANDERS: What I see and hear is a lot more pain and a lot more discontent than you see on television or you read in the papers. Just this morning, Tom and I were at a panel, unbelievable panel, of a woman who grew up in incredible poverty, went to college, and was actually hungry when she was in college. She didn`t have enough money to feed herself. Her story, you can multiply millions of times throughout this country.
The Democratic Party has got to hear that pain, and it has got to say, you know what? We`re going to stand up to those people who have the power, both economically and politically and we`re going to take them on. And we`re going to bring millions of people into the Democratic Party to create a party which will create a government that represents all Americans, not just the 1 percent.
PEREZ: And that woman, Chris, incidentally is reliant on the Affordable Care Act for some medical care that she needs. And if she didn`t have it, she would not have her lifeline. And that`s the story we hear everywhere. And that`s why the Republicans in the House are never going to be able to bring up that repeal because it helps too many people.
HAYES: We`ll see what happens. Senator Bernie Sanders and DNC chair Tom Perez, thanks for taking some time on this. That was a fascinating conversation.
PEREZ: It`s a pleasure to be with you.
HAYES: Thank you.
Ahead, has Bill O`Reilly hosted his last show on Fox News? New reports the network is looking at possible exit strategies. The latest ahead.
Plus, misplacing an armada. That`s tonight`s Thing One, Thing Two starting next.
HAYES: Thing One tonight, ever called someone buddy because you forgot their name? President Trump was asked about North Korea, and here`s what he said.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: I hope there`s going to be peace, but, you know, they`ve been talking with this gentleman for a long time. You read Clinton`s book. He said, oh, we made such a great peace deal, and it was a joke. You look at different things over the years with President Obama, everybody. He`s been outplayed. They`ve all been outplayed by this gentleman.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: Note that Kim Jong-un most certainly did not negotiate with President Clinton during that deal because he was 10 years old at the time. He`s only been in power since 2011, following the death of his father Kim Jong-il.
But details like that haven`t stopped the president from flexing America`s military muscles towards that gentleman`s nation. Here`s the president last week.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: We are sending an armada, very powerful. We have submarines, very powerful.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: Well, we actually have an update on that armada. Why did the navy just post a photo of the aircraft carrier leading that fleet more than 3,000 miles from North Korea? That`s Thing Two in 60 seconds.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SPICER: A carrier group is several things. The forward deployment is deterrence, presence. I think when you see a carrier group steaming into an area like that, the forward presence of that is clearly through almost every instance a huge deterrence.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: Steaming into an area. Steaming into it. That briefing a week ago followed an April 8 announcement by the navy that the Carrier Vinson and a strike group were ordered to the Korean Peninsula. The carrier was in Singapore, and Spicer described it as steaming towards the Sea of Japan as a symbol of, quote, huge deterrence.
But over the weekend, the Carrier Vinson showed up here at the Sunda Strait near Indonesia over 3,000 miles away, which we know because the navy posted a photo of it dated Saturday.
So as the president talked about the very powerful armada he sent to Korea, The New York Times reports the ships were at that very moment, sailing in the opposite direction to take part in joint exercises with the Australian navy in the Indian Ocean.
The Times describes a glitch ridden sequence of events that included an erroneous explanation by Defense Secretary Jim Mattis all of which perpetuated the false narrative.
The fleet is actually expected to depart for the Korean Peninsula tomorrow.
HAYES: Last night, I had the good fortune to visit the Ed Sullivan theater here in New York and appear as a guest on the Late Show with Stephen Colbert. We talked about my new book, a colony in a nation. We also talked about the president and his process for making decisions.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
STEPHEN COLBERT, HOST, LATE SHOW: It seems like almost a matter of mood.
COLBERT: What mood he`s in today.
HAYES: Or who is -- yeah. There`s a little bit of this kind of mad king air to it, right, like it`s like the way that we think about, you know, sort of Shakespeare depictions of courtly life, right? It`s like the king is there, and the king just has impulses. And then there`s advisers who come in who have actual views. And if they get close enough to the king, then they can get the king to have their view as well.
And you get that feeling, particularly the way that all this sort of palace intrigue is covered that, you know, who has his ear can get the guy to essentially agree to anything.
COLBERT: Who do you trust over there?
HAYES: No one.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: You can catch the whole interview on our Facebook page, Facebook.com/AllinwithChris. My thanks to the Late Show and Stephen Colbert.
Up next, more allegations leveled at Bill O`Reilly as new reporting suggests Fox News is actually very seriously considering cutting ties.
HAYES: Is Bill O`Reilly finished at Fox News? CNN`s Brian Stelter reports tonight that Fox News and O`Reilly are talking about an exit. And 21st Century Fox`s board of directors will hold a meeting on Thursday where O`Reilly will be a primary topic.
NBC News has not confirmed that report.
Three sources with knowledge of the discussions told New York magazine`s Gabe Sherman that the Murdoch`s are leaning towards pulling O`Reilly off the air.
And Matt Judge, conservative commentator, creator of the Judge Report tweeted out today, O`Reilly has had tremendous run, very few in the business get to decide when and how things end. Media is most brutal of all industries.
Earlier this month, a New York Times investigation found that five women had accused Bill O`Reilly of sexual harassment or other inappropriate behavior. They all received payouts from either O`Reilly or Fox News totaling about 13 million dollars.
O`Reilly released a statement about the New York Times reports saying in part he had, quote, "put to rest any controversies to spare my children."
Fox News also responded in a statement which reads, in part, while he denies the merits of these claims, Mr. O`Reilly has resolved those he regarded as his personal responsibility.
Two other women have also recently come forward alleging harassment, but according to their lawyer, they are not asking for money, just accountability.
One of them is Wendy Walsh, formerly a regular guest on O`Reilly`s show who has spoken publicly of her allegations of sexual harassment. The other woman came forward today. Her lawyer, Lisa Bloom, tweeting that her client just phoned in a complaint of sexual and racial harassment against Bill O`Rreilly to the Fox News hotline.
O`Reilly`s lawyer released a statement in response to the new accusation, quote, "it is outrageous that an allegation from an anonymous person about something that purportedly happened almost a decade ago is being treated as fact, especially where there is obviously an orchestrated campaign by activists and lawyers to destroy Mr. O`Reilly and enrich themselves through publicity driven donations."
He then released a second statement, quote, "Bill O`Reilly has been subjected to a brutal campaign of character assassination that is unprecedented in post-McCarthyist America. This law firm has uncovered evidence that the smear campaign is being orchestrated by far left organizations bent on destroying O`Reilly for political and financial reasons. That evidence will be put forth shortly and it is irrefutable."
But the new accuser`s lawyer Lisa Bloom maintains her client, who wishes to remain anonymous, was harassed by Mr. O`Reilly.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLP)
LISA BLOOM, ATTORNEY: She alleges that she was a clerical worker at Fox News in 2008. She did not work directly for Bill O`Reilly but for a different broadcaster who she says was a great boss. But she says that Bill O`Reilly would come by her desk on a regular basis and make offensive comments and sounds to her. She said he would grunt like an animal. He would call her hot chocolate - she`s African-American. He would say, mm- hmm when they were alone in an elevator together and she got off first. He`d say looking good, girl. And while any of these comments taken alone may not be all that bad, she said he never spoke to her otherwise. He never even said hello, or how are you? And she was really quite frightened of him.
HAYES: If I`m not mistaken, they have - the O`Reilly camp, as they have done with all of these allegations, denied any wrongdoing.
BLOOM: I haven`t heard that, but I would assume.
HAYES: I don`t know if they have specifically. I should just say as a sort of blanket note. I don`t if they`ve responded yet to this.
They have also, you know, the line that has come from Bill O`Reilly in the past when he has faced legal troubles over allegations of this sort is that he`s a public target, that people are doing this essentially for money and to ruin him because he`s made enemies.
BLOOM: So, my client from today, like Wendy Walsh, is not asking for any money, not a dime, not a nickel, not a penny. I`m representing her and all of my O`Reilly accusers for free. So that is...
HAYES: You are.
BLOOM: So, that`s clearly not a motivation.
Yes, I am.
HAYES: So then what is this about?
BLOOM: This is about accountability, and this is about women`s rights in the workplace. You know, it disgusts me as an attorney for a lot of women in a lot of sexual harassment cases how far we still have to go.
This is not about an isolated comment, it`s about women`s mental health, because I spoke with three witnesses before I came forward with this woman today - her sister, her roommate at the time and her boyfriend at the time. And they all described her as someone who at the beginning of the job was a happy-go-lucky person. She was very excited to have the job at Fox News. It`s a big company. She thought it was great for her career.
And day by day, she says Bill O`Reilly wore her down. And they describe her as somebody who came home and talked about how Bill O`Reilly would demean her in the workplace and how it really caused her to be depressed and stressed out.
HAYES: You are someone who has represented women in these situations in other fields and...
BLOOM: For 30 years, yes.
HAYES: So I guess one question here is, how much -- the picture that`s been painted in terms of the allegations against Roger Ailes first that had him leave and I think allegations that I don`t think it`s crazy to say seem relatively founded, at least there was enough there for him to be removed.
And the allegations that have accumulated against Bill O`Reilly, how different is that on the bell curve of hostile workplaces, in your career? Do you see what I`m saying? Like, I can`t tell if we`re seeing a snapshot of a culture that`s distinct or we`re seeing a snapshot of a culture that maybe isn`t that distinct.
BLOOM: Well, I think we have an epidemic of sexual harassment in this country. And it`s one of the primary drivers of the wage gap because women leave jobs where they`re sexually harassed, less than 10 percent actually report it at the time.
They choose to just leave and then they have a loss of income. They take a lesser job just to get away from it. When they report, they`re often retaliated against. That`s illegal and I represent a lot of women in retaliation cases.
But Fox News clearly is the worst. And that`s why I called upon the state agency, the New York state division of human rights last week, to do an independent investigation into the culture of harassment and retaliation at Fox News. There has not been an independent investigation. The law firm Paul Weiss (ph) represents the company. They are not independent. And that needs to happen to protect women because these claims are still happening all the time.
HAYES: One can only imagine what an investigation like that would find.
Lisa Bloom, thanks for your time.
HAYES: We reached out to Fox News for comment when the news broke tonight that the country is reportedly talking with Bill O`rRilly about a possible exit. They have not yet responded to us.
That is All In for this evening. The Rachel Maddow Show starts right now.
Good evening, Rachel.
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED. END