IE 11 is not supported. For an optimal experience visit our site on another browser.

All in with Chris Hayes, Transcript 9/7/17 Hillary Book Excerpts

Guests: Eric Swalwell, Michelle Goldberg

Show: ALL IN with CHRIS HAYES Date: September 7, 2017

Guest: Eric Swalwell, Michelle Goldberg

CHRIS MATTHEWS, MSNBC HOST: That`s HARDBALL for now. Thank you for being with us. "ALL IN" with Chris Hayes starts right now.



DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: It`s the largest hurricane they`ve ever seen coming out of Atlantic.

HAYES: As the President waits for Hurricane Irma, his son faces the music.

TRUMP: My son is a wonderful young man.

HAYES: Tonight, at the Mueller investigation moves inside the White House, what we`ve learned from Donald Trump Jr.`s interview in the Senate today.

SEN. RICHARD BLUMENTHAL (D), CONNECTICUT: Raised more questions than answered.

HAYES: And what we know about his changing story.

TRUMP JR.: I don`t think my sirens you know, went up, or the antennas went up.

HAYES: Then after yesterday`s deal, the Democratic leader goes right to Trump tweet.

REP. NANCY PELOSI (D-CA), HOUSE MINORITY LEADER: This is -- I asked the President to do it and boom, boom, boom, the tweet appeared.

HAYES: I`ll ask Senator Bernie Sanders if Democrats should trust the President. And as Irma bears down on Florida, a look at the daunting task of evacuating massive cities.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: If you`re told to evacuate, get out.

HAYES: When ALL IN starts right now.


HAYES: Good evening from New York, I`m Chris Hayes. Tonight, South Florida is racing to prepare for the worst as Hurricane Irma continues on its path of destruction through the Caribbean. At this hour, Irma is moving towards the Bahamas with maximum sustained wind of 175 miles per hour. The category five storm already blamed for this nine deaths, a state of emergency has been declared in the U.S. Virgin Islands which took a direct hit from Irma yesterday. And in Puerto Rico which was spared the worst of the storm, more than a million people are still without power. According to the latest forecast, the hurricane is now on track to hit South Florida by Sunday forcing tens of thousands of people to evacuate out of harm`s way and the City of Miami is in the crosshairs. First, let`s go to NBC News Meteorologist Bill Karins with the latest. Bill, what`s it look like?

BILL KARINS, NBC NEWS METEOROLOGIST: Good evening to you Chris. It is looking horrible right now for the Turks and Caicos. They`re getting it just as bad as the British Virgin Islands. There`s the eye of the hurricane going right over the island as I speak and you can see the sun setting on the storm. Now, currently, 175-mile-per-hour winds, still a very powerful cat five. And look now, you can see there`s the Bahamas and there`s Miami. That`s how close the storm is already getting to South Florida. We only have really all day tomorrow for the final preps and then weather will start go downhill. Hurricane watches (INAUDIBLE) Lake Okeechobee is now even having evacuations around it. And of course, on the Florida west and east side, we are all at risk from this storm.

I`ll show you our computer models because these are the two things, are two really reliable long range models are now at excellent agreement. This is 2:00 a.m. Sunday and as we go throughout the morning hours, the storms, both of them, take it right through South Florida. We still have 48 hours for some shifts. We still are very concerned with the West Coast and the East Coast. We do not yet know who will be hit the worst. But the storm approaching from the south, the dirty side, the worst side of the storm surge and the wind is the east side. So that`s why we`re especially concerned with Key Largo to Miami all through West Palm Beach and Fort Pierce.

If it shifts further west, then it`ll bring those stronger winds in the Naples and Fort Myers. But on this path, that`s the area of greatest concern and a lot of our smaller computer model that we have, these are updated about every six hours. They all still are all pointing directly out Southeast Florida. I mean, this is excellent agreement, 48 hours out. This shows the strongest of the storm, 8:00 a.m. Sunday morning with the potential for even Miami to be in the eye of the hurricane which I mean, a category four or five hurricane right over the top of Miami is possible.

And turn your TVs on as we go throughout early Sunday morning. And then storm just races further up to the North. I mean, we`re in the potential here for the hurricane force winds not only to be in Southeast Florida but potential to be right through the state. This is another of our short range models. It comes out every three hours and this shows you the wind field. When we get to the purple, that`s when the power starts to go out. That 8:00 p.m. Saturday on the Keys and starting to approach Miami as we go throughout 8:00 p.m. Saturday. That`s when you start to see those green flashes, the transformers blowing into distances and then the power will start going out. So it could be a pretty scary night as the power goes out and then the winds really increase.

Now, this model is a little further to the East than the other ones. Again, they`re from anywhere on the West Coast still to the East Coast. We have a big about 50 to 60-mile-an-hour range here where the storm could. So because it shows it offshore doesn`t mean that`s going to happen. It`s just, I just want to show you how big the wind field is. The white is the hurricane force winds and the hurricane center has that directly over the top of the state Chris.

So the bottom line is, tomorrow is the final day for preparations, it`s the final day really because -- for evacuations -- because by the time we get to Saturday, especially Saturday evening, the weather will quickly go downhill. And Chris, I just want to tell you one other thing, I was just talking to my family members in Florida, they can`t even get hotel rooms in Georgia. People have to drive even further than that to find a safe place to stay.

HAYES: All right, Bill Karins, thank you for that. That is sobering. We`re going to have much more on the storm later tonight. Tomorrow we`ll be live at 8:00 p.m. from Miami, Florida. I`ll be there through the weekend as the category five storm makes landfall. And then there`s the big news on Capitol Hill today. That`s the President`s eldest son Donald Trump Jr. going before congressional investigators for the first time to answer questions about his meeting during the campaign with Russian nationals, Russian nationals who are promising dirt on Hillary Clinton from the Russian government.

The President`s son was grilled for five hours by the staff of the Senate Judiciary Committee with a handful of Senators sitting in. And the reaction Democrats could be sound up from the statement released afterwards by Senator Chris Coons, warning that while Don Junior wasn`t under oath, "It is important to remember that anyone who testifies in front of the Senate Committee is under the restrictions of the false statements statute that says material false statements to Congress are criminal and punishable with fines or imprisonment or both."

The interview took place behind closed doors in a secure facility on Capitol Hill. The President`s son managed to get in and out without having to face the press or cameras but NBC News obtained a copy of the prepared statement he gave to investigators which offer yet another explanation for taking that meeting at Trump Tower in June 2016. By our account, at least the third or possibly fourth version today. First, it was the misleading public statement approved by the President himself describing the meeting as primarily about an adoption program. Then after e-mails emerged showing Don Junior had been promised " information that would incriminate Hillary, part of Russia and it`s government`s support for Mr. Trump, we were told that seeking dirt on your point from a hostile foreign power was perfectly normal.


TRUMP: I think from a practical standpoint, most people would have taken that meeting. It`s called opposition research or even research into your opponent. I`ve had many people -- I have only been in politics two years but I`ve had many people call up, oh gee, we have information on this factor or this person or frankly Hillary. That`s very standard in politics.


HAYES: Now Don Jr. says it was his patriotic duty to take the meeting with Russian agents, "To the extent they had information concerning the fitness, character or qualifications of a presidential candidate, I believe that I should at least hear them will out." Well, he previously insisted the whole meeting was above board, Don Junior now acknowledges the potential red flags, telling the Committee, "Depending on what, if any information they had, I could then consult with counsel to make an informed decision as to whether to give it further consideration."

And in his statement, the President`s son confirms for the first time what we right here on the show suspected, that there were undisclosed phone calls between Don Junior and his intermediaries in addition to the e-mail traffic setting up the meeting.

According to Don Junior, his phone records show three short phone calls with Emin Agalarov, remember that Russian pop star connected to the Trump family business through his father who helped set up the meeting. But Don Junior says I do not recall speaking to Emin. It is possible we left each other voicemail messages. I simply do not remember. He told the Committee he never discussed the meeting again after it took place or even gave it a second thought. And he says neither he nor anyone he knows have colluded with the foreign government during campaign. Following his five hour interview today, Don Junior released a statement thanking the Committee for their professionalism, emphasizing his own candor and adding "I trust this interview fully satisfied their inquiry." But the members of the Committee don`t sound satisfied. According to Democratic Senator Richard Blumenthal, this won`t be Don Junior`s last trip to Capitol Hill.


BLUMENTHAL: Today was another step but more like a beginning, because he needs to come before the Judiciary Committee in public under oath and answer many of the same questions. Because today he raised questions, as well as answering -- in fact raising more questions than has been answered.


HAYES: Democratic Congressman Eric Swalwell, a Member of the House Intelligence Committee which is conducting its own investigation of the Trump campaign`s potential ties to Russia. And Congressman, based on the reports that are available publicly, are you satisfied that Don Junior answered all the questions he needs to answer?

REP. ERIC SWALWELL (D), CALIFORNIA: Good evening Chris. And first, just with respect to that storm, I want to assure the stranded Americans in the Caribbean Island that`s Republicans and I are working together in a bipartisan way to get them out of there. They are already suffering. I`m working them tonight on that with the State Department. With respect to Don Junior, Chris, no, not at all. It`s time for him to come clean under oath. Tell us the prologue and the epilog from that contact he had at the Trump Tower. It`s also remarkable Chris that he doesn`t the recall the follow-up phone calls. This sounds like Jared Kushner who didn`t even recall the meeting. It`s like possible side effects from meetings with Russians include completely forgetting the meeting`s even ever happened.

HAYES: Let me ask you then straight up. Do you not believe them? When they say -- when Don Junior says I don`t remember, is he lying?

SWALWELL: It is -- it is unbelievable that they would have so many meetings with the foreign adversary during the election and then just completely not being able to recall them. So no, I don`t believe them. And there`s too many of them who have failed to recall. There`s no innocent explanation any further. It`s a pattern of deception, a pattern of failing to recall and it looks like a pattern to avoid accountability.

HAYES: Richard Blumenthal says he wants to see Don Junior back. There`s all sorts of questions about these various lines of investigation. There`s the Senate Judiciary Committee, there`s the Senate Intelligence Committee, there`s your Committee in the House Intelligence Committee. Are you planning to bring Don Junior in?

SWALWELL: We would like him in. Yes, we want everyone who was a part of that e-mail chain and who attended the Trump Tower meeting. Yes, we want to hear from them all with their hand raised under oath.

HAYES: Do you believe that nothing happened -- as a result of that meeting, that no one ever talked about it again?

SWALWELL: No. It doesn`t make sense, Chris. Again, when you read the e- mail exchange, it looks like there was a prior existing relationship. And when you hear from you know, Don Junior and the limited information that Jared Kushner provides, it`s hard to imagine that there wasn`t follow-up. And so that`s why the best thing that the President can do and the people on this team can do is to just come forward and be forthcoming about what happened. What were the personal, political and financial relationships? And also, for Republicans to show unity with Democrats in wanting to get to the bottom of this because our disunity only sharpens the knives for the Russians and prevents us from strengthening our own shield as we go to the next election.

HAYES: Finally, a member of your Committee, the Chair of your Committee, Devin Nunes who sort of have recused himself for this inquiry, is now threatening contempt at Attorney General and the Director of the FBI over any documents not being turned over related to that infamous Steele Dossier. Whal is your reaction to that?

SWALWELL: It slows us down, Chris. He shouldn`t be a part of anything involving Russia. He had recused himself. He`s also asking for something that he has not been denied. The custom has been that Republicans and Democrats ask for voluntary cooperation from witnesses. If they deny it, then we consider sending a subpoena. There`s no evidence that they were denied this. And what they`re trying to do is to undermine the purpose behind the Steele Dossier rather than looking at what was alleged in the Steele Dossier. Again, it is just a misguided way of conducting this investigation. And the worst thing that we`re doing is showing disunity and making it easier for the Russians to come at us again.

HAYES: Congressman Eric Swalwell, thanks for your time.

SWALWELL: My pleasure.

HAYES: MSNBC Legal Contributor Jill Wine Banks, former Assistant Watergate Special Prosecutor, and Barbara McQuade also an MSNBC Legal Contributor, former U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Michigan. Jill, let me start with you. What kind of legal exposure do you think Don Junior has?

JILL WINE BANKS, MSNBC LEGAL CONTRIBUTOR: He has obviously perjury or false statement liability. I have to say that telling the truth is not a multiple choice exercise and that seems to be what he`s doing. As you pointed out, he`s had a number of explanations for the meeting. And the only one that makes sense is what the words of the e-mails say. The words say we`re getting together to give you dirt on Hillary to help you win the election and to hurt Hillary Clinton. That is the illegal act, taking information from a foreign government, especially a foreign adversary is a crime in and of itself. And then lying about it and giving multiple choice answers is another crime. So he has a lot of legal liability.

HAYES: Barbara, I do not recall as an answer, I remember watching under oath testimony, I think it was during around Iran-contra. There`s a lot of I do not recalls in that testimony. That seems to be a way of sort of threading the needle because who can say that you`re lying about what you do and don`t remember. I mean, how much experience do you have with folks under oath or expose the possibility of perjury charges while under oath saying they don`t remember a thing?

BARBARA MCQUADE, MSNBC LEGAL CONTRIBUTOR: Yes. That`s a common tactic. I mean, sometimes people truly don`t remember things.

HAYES: Right, of course.

MCQUADE: I mean, this meeting happened over a year ago so it is a possibility. But there are other pieces of evidence you can use to show that that in itself is a false statement. If he had conversations with others, has he gotten together Jared Kushner, Paul Manafort and others who are at the meeting to get their stories straight? Has he written documents? Has he talked to others? So you could find other evidence that demonstrates that he does in fact recall. He just doesn`t want to tell you.

HAYES: One of the things that he says he doesn`t recall Jill, is how that statement came together. And that statement is now the subject of some fairly pointed inquiry Robert Mueller according to some reporting that says that Mueller now wants to talk to White House staff about how that statement was created. What do you make of that?

BANKS: I think it`s obviously strange to have him saying, I don`t remember, I don`t recall and not to remember that statement particularly and I want to point out that during Watergate, one of the tapes you can hear the President saying, you can always say, I don`t remember, I don`t recall and it is perjury to say that when you actually do remember. And Barbara is very correct in saying, oftentimes, there are other elements that will prove that they do remember. So that could be another case of legal liability. In terms of -- in terms of Mueller starting to go to White House staff Barbara, I mean, here`s what`s interesting to me and I`d like to hear what you think of this.

Crafting a statement that`s not true or misleading isn`t a crime. You know, the President could lie to the American people all he wants and that`s not -- that it doesn`t run afoul of the law necessarily but it seems that it must be related into what kind of conception they have with the state of the mind of the President with respect to obstruction. Is that your understanding?

MCQUADE: I think so. You know, of course, we can only speculate but is it all part of a big scheme the try to obstruct the investigation into the firing of Jim Comey, into the whole Russian investigation? So yes, I think it is. They`re looking for evidence to sort of mislead and conceal others and get them off the path of this big meeting. If he can get this out of headlines and get people to stop talking about it, and get Mueller to think that this was no big deal, then maybe he moves on. So although the act itself is not a crime, I think it could be evidence of criminal intent.

HAYES: Do you expect -- we know that some of the other people Jill have gone before the grand -- some of the grand jury that are -- that are being used by the Special Counsel Robert Mueller. Do you expect Don Junior will have to do that at some point?

BANKS: I think it is a logical step. If you want to return indictments, the grand jury needs to hear direct evidence from all the witnesses. And I want to add one thing which is, I do think that lying to the public is not a crime in and of itself but repeated lies, repeated misstatements, repeated nondisclosures can be the pattern that shows that you are obstructing justice. And I think in this case, we`re heading very quickly to the conclusion that all the false statements are done deliberately to throw the investigators and the Special Prosecutor off their mark and to mislead them into investigating the wrong things.

HAYES: All right. Jill Wine Banks and Barbara McQuade, it`s always a pleasure to have you both. Thank you very much.

MCQUADE: Thanks, Chris.

HAYES: John Sipher served for almost three decades in the CIA`s Clandestine Service where he once ran the Agency of Russian Program. He says that that infamous dossier on the President`s alleged connection to Russia is starting to look more like truth than fiction. And John, I appreciate you coming in because we`ve been wrestling for months with the status to afford this document which is not verified, which we can`t check independently as journalist or we can attempt to but it`s very hard. You wrote a piece basically saying judging it generally credible. What was your reasoning for that judgement?

JOHN SIPHER, FORMER SENIOR CIA OFFICER: Well, there`s so much information out there and frankly, I can`t keep up with it and it`s hard to put it into place. But what I can do is look at that rapport as a professional intelligence officer and give some sense of what that is. It`s generally called a dossier which suggests it`s a report you know, with a bow tied around it that, you know, summarizes something. That`s not -- that`s not what it is. It`s a series of 17 raw intelligence reports similar to those we wrote as human intelligence officers in the CIA. What you`re -- in each one of those, what you`re doing is you`re reporting good-faith effort of what your sources are saying.

And they`re contemporaneous at the time and there`s a series of them going through. And what they described was you know, a long term relationship with Trump and the Trump family with Russia. They described a separate effort to collect information on Mrs. Clinton and an effort to marry the two to influence our election, and it talked about cyber-attacks, it talks about some of the personalities. And what I tried to do was then look and see what has happened since that time to see if there`s any validity to what was reported.

HAYES: And what did you find when you -- when you looked at particularly thing -- I mean, the sort of proof in the putting, right, is if things happen after those documents are written that then sort of retroactively confirm elements of that that speaks to their credibility. What did you find?

SIPHER: It does. There`s still you know, difficult things here and any raw intelligence report is reporting what a source says. And the national intelligence reporting is you know, vetting and validating those sources as best they can. What we`re doing in the intelligence community is (INAUDIBLE) collectors, you know, connect the dots.

What we do is we take source reporting, we put it together as best we can, we usually put out how reliable we think that source is, was that information first or secondhand access? And then that information goes together with a variety of other information to analysts who then connect the dots and try to look at that across. So you know, in the intelligence community, in the investigative community, what they would be doing is looking at the dossier sort of as a framework and then trying to test and validate each of those pieces, ask follow up questions and continue to look at it. What you as journalist, what`s difficult is you have to have two or three different people validating these sources. If this was an intelligence operation in a foreign country, you`re never going to get that. Whereas in an intelligence organization would do was continue to sort of push, challenge, ask new questions and go back to the sources.

HAYES: So, one of the things about the dossier, there`s two aspects of it that I think have made it hard for people to swallow or it raises some natural skepticism. One is the sort of most salacious details which just seems bizarre. But the broader thing is just the scope of the conspiracy, frankly. The scope of the activity it describes, right? Not that there were sort of coincidental interests that manage to marry to each other at this moment in time, but rather a long term sustained, plotted out strategy of penetration and cooptation by the Russians of the Trump family and org well before he ran for President. How credible do you find that?

SIPHER: Well, the one thing that is very credible of the report is Russian methods. When I read the report having served at Moscow and worked on Russia issues for much of my career with other colleagues, that part of it which looks strange to most observers is the part that looks real to us, collecting, compromising information. Collecting information on people trying to develop conspiratorial relationships of people that can perhaps be used later, perhaps not. That part of it is real. The other part that is certainly real is the Russians` you know, intention in a number of different ways, using cyber, using human and using disinformation and deceptions to attack the U.S. system. That part of it is clear.

The parts related to the Trump family, we would have to look at those and try to put them together as what had happened since that time. And there are a number of things that fit. You were talking earlier about the June meeting. And I understand that interest and focus on that. But if you look at the narrative of the Steele dossier, Don Junior does not play an important part in that. However, that e-mail, if you believe that as an intelligence operation, and do I, that e-mail would be something to test the waters to see if the Trump campaign would be interested in that. And then that meeting wouldn`t be so important as what happens in that meeting, is that the fact that the Trump family, the three important people in that meeting did not report to the FBI. And that would be a signal to the Russians to move forward.

You got to remember, this is a hostile environment for the Russian intelligence. They can`t just show up at that meeting with the goods and hope that the Trumps did not turn that into the FBI or security.

HAYES: All right, John Sipher, thanks for being with us.

SIPHER: Thank you, Chris.

HAYES: Ahead, Nancy Pelosi is now writing tweets for the President. New fallout from the President`s sudden alliance with the Democrats in two- minutes.


HAYES: House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi took a victory lap this morning the day after President Trump blindsided his own party leaders and agreed with Congressional Democrats on the three-month debt ceiling in government funding deal. And as some Republicans continued fuming today, the President was feeling extolling the deal.


TRUMP: We had a great meeting yesterday with Nancy Pelosi and Senator Schumer. And it was a very bipartisan meeting. But I thought it was a very, very friendly -- it was a meeting that we all wanted to get together and do something.


HAYES: According to Politico, Trump was particularly happy about the deal because of the television coverage it was getting. "Trump specifically mentioned the T.V. segments praising the deal and indicated he been watching in a call with Senator Chuck Schumer. Today, the chumminess continued when President Trump called the Democratic Leader this morning. She asked him if he would compose a tweet for her.


PELOSI: He called this morning. I said thanks for calling. This is what we need -- people really need a reassurance from you, Mr. President that the six-month period is not a period of round-up but it`s just the DACA is frozen and that these people will not be vulnerable. I was reporting to my colleagues. I said this -- I asked the President to do and boom, boom, boom, the tweet appeared.


HAYES: The tweet appeared. Here`s the tweet, "For all those DACAthat are concerned about your status during the six-month period, you have nothing to worry about. No action." Which we should note is misleading. First of all, White House talking points urge the DACA recipients to "Prepare for and arrange their departure from the U.S. and also, those who have DACA protection that expires before that March 5th after reapplying the next month may have to take action, just to be clear. Now, Democrats are asking for more deals including a gentleman`s agreement yesterday to eliminate the debt ceiling entirely. But again, the world is littered with the remains of gentlemen`s agreements with Donald Trump. Michelle Goldberg writes about the President as a Columnist at Slate and has joined the New York Times Opinion Page as new Columnist and MSNBC Contributor Charlie Sikes, Author of How the Right Lost Its Mind. What do you make of this?

MICHELLE GOLDBERG, SLATE COLUMNIST: I mean, I think that it was fundamentally -- it seems like fundamentally just an act of spite, right? I don`t think it portends is any new era of triangulation or you know, a kind of a new centrist period of the Trump Presidency. I think he was just really mad at McConnell and Ryan and wanted to stick it to them wanted to garner some momentary good press at the cost of creating much greater liabilities for himself three months down the road, right? So I don`t think that there`s going to be any new era of cooperation with Democrats. But also, I know that some people on the left are uneasy about this because they don`t want -- obvious reasons, Democrats to be making deals with Trump. I think it`s really important to point out also that it`s almost misleading to call this a deal because there was no negotiation, there`s no, concessions, it`s just Democrats said this is what we want and Trump said, OK.

HAYES: Right. That`s a fair point. Charlie, I see lot of conservatives freaking out about this, angry about it. We told you so, particularly never Trumpers like yourself. But to flip it around, the fundamental problem that Donald Trump has, is that he`s the kind of guy and Paul Ryan who can`t keep his caucus together on must have votes. So of you can keep your caucus together on must have votes, this is what is the drove John Boehner into entire retirement. Why not just cut a deal with Chuck and NAncy?

CHARLIE SYKES, MSNBC CONTRIBUTOR: Well, yes, and you know, I agree with Michelle by the way that -- and I think it was Nicole Wallace who said, look, Donald Trump doesn`t play chess, he plays whack a mole. And what you had there was I think sort of an impulse. He got a chance to have a win on the one hand and number two, he had a chance humiliate Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell. So what`s not the like for Donald Trump`s point of view? But in terms of long term, you know, a long term of pivot. I mean, how many times -- I can`t believe the number pundit still talking about whether or not this President is going to pivot. But there`s no question from the point of view of Republicans and Conservatives, this was a big defeat and it sets the stage for a lot more defeats. The question is, you know, how will Nancy and Chuck use their new clout? How far will they push? How far will the Democratic base allow them to go in enabling the Trump Presidency?

HAYES: One thing that I think my read on Trump was that part of his genius in the primary. And I don`t only think that it was --


HAYES: It was intuitive was to realize that Republican base didn`t care about things that they (INAUDIBLE) said they cared about. Like big government and deficits. That wasn`t this was all about. It was about something much more (INAUDIBLE) and here I think he -- what happen was he got into office and started basically doing Ryanism. And now it`s just like no, the whole point was they don`t even want that and care about that. The base doesn`t care about --

GOLDBERG: Although the base does care about liberals here. And so I think that that is where this is risky, right? The base doesn`t care about, you know, tax cuts for corporations, but I think the base does care about the wall, it cares about nativism, and it cares about making people like us, frankly, suffer.

And so they don`t want to see him, you know, kind of tack back to...

HAYES: Or make him feel good.

Well, so here`s the other side of that is you have got Steve Bannon on the outside, right. And he is now saying he`s going to be sort of a wingman, a partner for Trump, but he is also an ideological enforcer.

I want you to respond, Charlie, to what he said to Charlie Rose. Take a listen.


STEVE BANNON, BREITBART: I think I`m street fighter.

By the way, I think that`s why Donald Trump and I get along so well. Donald Trump is a fighter, a great counter puncher. Great counter puncher. He`s a fighter.

I`m going to be his wing man outside for the entire time.


HAYES: How do you interpret that?

CHARLIE SYKES, CONSERVATIVE RADIO HOST: Well, I take it at face value that Steve Bannon is going to keep the base riled up. They`re going to keep the red meat flowing. And he`s going to use his clout to put pressure on particularly other Republicans here.

And, you know, by the way I agree with what Michelle had to say and what you had to say about, look, the base is not really -- they don`t get up in the morning worried about tax cuts but they do worry about things like immigration, which is why Nancy Pelosi, writing tweets about DACA for Donald Trump it is so interesting. And, Chris, I hope when we`re done with the show you check on Ann Coulter to make sure she`s all right.

Imagine how that`s is playing with the Steve Bannon, Ann Coulter right right now. Now, it`s good news for the dreamers, but you kind of wonder where this is trending.

HAYES: Well, but -- the other -- two things here, one is that it was perfect because he didn`t quite get it -- like, it was not -- it didn`t grasp the details of what`s happening, what he himself did. So it was not quite -- right, it wasn`t going right.

But it`s also, like the idea, when I read that they had a gentlemen`s agreement -- to Charlie`s part between Chuck and the president, I thought to myself if you enter a gentleman`s agreement with Donald Trump, you are an idiot if you think that`s going to happen.

GOLDBERG: Right, but the thing is -- but I don`t think that Democrats are counting on him to uphold this. I think that in as much as they`ve made this deal for this immediate piece of legislation, and they have this gentlemen`s agreement that they certainly can`t count on but that meanwhile drives a further wedge between Donald Trump and congressional Republicans.

You know, again, I think that Democrats can make a lot of demands of Trump because they`re not expecting anything from him.

HAYES: It is really fascinating to watch politics when you just strip away caring about any like policy. I mean, which has what has been sort of remarkable watching this the whole time.

Michelle Goldberg and Charlie Sykes, thank you for your time

Ahead, Senator Bernie Sanders joins me here in studio to talk about the president`s sudden interest in working with Democrats. What he thinks ahead.


HAYES: So, here`s what appeared to have happened yesterday. President Trump, unmoored from any strong policy commitments other than a handful of pet principles, seemed willing to double cross his own party and make deals with Democrats. And the notion of President Trump working with Democrats is here, and this new era, whether it`s short lived or not raises real questions for Democrats. Do they risk selling out?

Former presidential candidate Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont joins me. Nice to have you here in New York City

SEN. BERNIE SANDERS, (I) VERMONT: It`s good to be with you.

HAYES: It`s been interesting to watch the reaction to this deal that was cut yesterday. And I want to play you something that Congressman Luis Gutierrez, who you served with in the House, said about the deal and get your reaction to it. Because a lot of people were saying, wow this is great, this is great. This is what he had to say. Take a listen.


REP. LUIS GUTIERREZ, (D) ILLINOIS: The Democratic caucus is not in sync with making this agreement with the president of the United States of America. I have spoken to dozen of members of the Democratic caucus. The Democratic Party has to stand for something. When the CEO of Microsoft says you have to come through him to get to the dreamers, and he`s to the left of the Democratic Party, it`s a sad day for the Democratic Party in this nation.


HAYES: What do you think of that?

SANDERS: What I think about is that what Trump did in removing 800,000 great young people from DACA protection is one of the ugliest things that any president in the modern history of this country has ever done. And I think we have got to be smart and we`ve got to win that fight.

And the key here is being smart. And that means attaching DACA legislation to reverse what Trump did to legislation that the Republicans need to have passed.

HAYES: Right. So Congressman Gutierrez`s point, right, and this is really a tactical dispute. I don`t think there`s any goal difference here across the Democratic caucus which wants to see these protections put into law, right, is that play hard ball now when you have this as opposed to this three-month extension. There`s to guarantee you`re going to be able to attach it. Are you confident this is the right move?

SANDERS: Well, what we need to do. I mean, it is one thing to talk fervently about the issues, but you know what on the Senate, we need 60 votes, OK. And if Luis can get us those 12 Republican votes tomorrow, I think we`re ready to move.

Dick Durbin is working night and day on this. I think we have four or five Republican votes right now. I think we stand an excellent chance...

HAYES: I see.

SANDERS: To get the votes we need. The goal is to win this thing.

HAYES: Right. Right. Right. Right. Well, that`s an interesting bit of insight. Because sometimes it`s very hard to track these deals. I remember there were deals that Boehner and Obama cut a few times where everyone was mad and you couldn`t -- and the White House would say, no, no you don`t understand. We won.

SANDERS: But let me just say this. And I think I speak for every Democratic caucus in the Senate and I think the House as well. What Trump did is unspeakable. And we have to protect these young people and we will.

HAYES: OK. So, here`s the question, I remember talking to you right in the beginning of this administration. And there was this question about how are Democrats going to deal with this guy. And there are certain things where there`s a kind of Vin diagram policy overlap: renegotiating NAFTA or killing TPP, right, some stuff on infrastructure. And then there is obviously places where there`s opposition.

The path he`s gone down from a policy perspective has been a very Paul Ryan Republican Party path.

SANDERS: I would say it was a Koch brothers path -- tax breaks for billionaires, denying the reality of climate change, trying to destroy public health care in America, throwing 32 million people off of heatlh insurance, extreme right-wing agenda.

HAYES: OK. So then this thing happened yesterday that had people sort of scratching their heads. Chuck Schumer has another meeting today with the president. Are there is the sort of question like is there some deals to work out here. And yet at the same time, you have got to be thinking to yourself the world is littered with people on the wrong side of Donald Trump deals. Right, like how are you thinking -- is this someone that the Democrats can do business with, is my question?

SANDERS: I think you look at issue by issue. You say to Donald Trump, what did you with regard to DACA is unacceptable. Let`s work together to reverse that. And if you`re prepared to do that, if you`re prepared to put a trillion dollars into infrastructure without privatizing it, if you are prepared to do what you said during the campaign is take on the drug companies and lower the outrageously high cost of prescription drugs, if you want to work with us on those issues let`s go forward together.

HAYES: I saw news -- and I almost can`t believe this is happening. But I saw news of a one last ditch attempt at Obamacare repeal. So, you have got this ticking tock, right, which is the 50 vote majority the Republicans expires in a few weeks, am I right about that.

This procedure is maddening to all of us. We don`t understand it. But it`s going to expire. They`re going to take one more run at it. Are you worried about this? Is this a serious thing that`s happening in the senate right now?

SANDERS: No. I don`t think they have the time to get their act together. I don`t believe that that is going to happen.

In fact, Lamar Alexander, the chairman of the health, education, and labor committee has been holding a series of hearings on some aspects of health care trying to work on a bipartisan way.

HAYES: All right, I want to ask you about, and I`ve read your responses to this portion of Hillary Clinton`s book. This is going to happen, you`re going to get asked about this.

SANDERS: I`m shocked that you`re interested in this.

HAYES: Here is a portion that I thought got to something that sort of interestingly deep and substantive, and continues in the party today. And this is about the sort of -- let`s call it the frontier of the possible, the question of what a presidential candidate is selling their voters, and what goals they`re setting in this sort of trade off between reality, right.

So, she says no matter how bold and progressive my policy proposals were, Bernie would come out with something even bigger, loftier and leftier, regardless of whether it was realistic or not.

And then Jake Sullivan has this analogy to There`s Something About Mary where a deranged hitchhiker says he`s come up with a brilliant plan, instead of the famous eight minute abs exercise routine he`s going to market seven minute abs. It`s the same, just quicker.

SANDERS: I.E. Bernie Sanders just stole all of Hillary Clinton`s ideas. Does anybody really believe that?

The truth is, and the real story is that the ideas we brought forth during that campaign, which were so crazy and radical, have increasingly become mainstream. I talked about a $15 an hour minimum wage. Hillary did not. You know what, we got 31 co-sponsors on legislation for $15 an hour minimum wage.

Talked about a trillion-dollar infrastructure. We talked about making health care a right of all people through Medicare for all.

Medicare for all is becoming mainstream within the Democratic Party.

So many -- making public colleges and universities tuition free. Talk to the governor of the state of New York. He`s pretty proud of his accomplishment.

So, what I`m saying here, Chris, is many of the ideas that we talked about that Secretary Clinton and others said, oh, those are too far out, they are the ideas that are sweeping America that most Americans now support.

HAYES: All right, so one more follow up on this, which is this, of the things we saw happen with Republicans is they told their voters they could do all these things that they turned they couldn`t really do. This happened all the time with -- it happened during the shutdown. They said we could repeal Obamacare even if we don`t have the presidency. The couldn`t do that, right.

We saw what happened when their promises on the ACA ran into reality and it was a disaster, right.

I guess the question is, is there some line for you, when you think about what candidates in the Democratic Party are pushing, or -- politicians, not presidential candidates, where you feel like there`s a responsibility to give a projection of what is possible?

SANDERS: That`s right. But you heard me, because I was on your show a dozen times. What did I always talk about? I always talked about a political revolution, right. I always talked about bringing millions of people into the political process to transform politics in America. You never heard me say, hey, elect me. I`m going to do it all.

We are right now on Wednesday going to introduce Medicare for all, single payer program. Let me be very clear, that will not be passed if Trump is president, and Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell run the United States congress. The only way we will take on the drug companies and the insurance companies and do what every other major country on Earth is doing is through a political revolution where people stand up and fight back.

So everything that I said I brought forth ideas that I thought and believe are reasonable ideas, not radical ideas. They exist in many parts of the country -- I`m talking about making public colleges and universities tuition free. It exists in Germany. It exists in Scandinavia.

And what I have said is millions of people got to jump into the political process, stand up and fight back. And we`re beginning to see some of that as well.

HAYES: All right, Senator Bernie Sanders, good to have you here in person.

SANDERS: Good to be with you, Chris.

HAYES: Still to come, as Florida prepares for a hurricane wider than the state itself, how do people in major cities get to safety? And why the design of Miami makes it especially vulnerable.

And Thing One, Thing Two next.


HAYES: Thing One tonight, with a hurricane barreling down on Florida and most likely Mar-a-Lago, the Palm Beach estate and private golf club owned by the president, the Trump organization is taking advance action. "Our teams at the Trump properties in Florida are taking all the proper precautions following local and Florida state advisories very closely to ensure that everyone is kept safe and secure."

And it only makes sense considering Mar-a-Lago has been down this road before.

In 2004, the estate was in the path of Hurricane`s Jean and Frances and in 2005 Hurricane Wilma.

When Wilma hit Florida, the worst of the bunch, Mar-a-Lago was spared and significant damage. Yet somehow the president claimed otherwise and managed to get a very significant return. That`s Thing Two in 60 seconds.


HAYES: After Hurricane Wilma hit Florida in 2005, Donald Trump cited some of the work that needed to be done to Mar-a-Lago due to damage caused by the storm, quote, "landscaping, roofing, walls, painting, leaks, artwork in the -- you know, the great tapestries, tiles, Spanish tiles, the beach, the erosion. It`s still not what it was."

And Trump claimed a $17 million insurance payday on his property.

But the Associated Press found little evidence of such large-scale damage. And that Trump`s description of extensive damage does not match those of Mar-a-Lago members and even Trump loyalists.

Take, for instance, the account from Donald Trump`s longtime former Butler who made news last year after appearing to call for Barack Obama to be lynched.

He said, quote, "that house has never been seriously damaged. I was there for all the hurricanes."

It also makes you think if Mar-a-Lao had really suffered $17 million in hurricane damage, would Trump have hosted nearly 400 guests at Mar-a-Lago for the wedding of his son Donald Jr. just over two months later.

Two years after the storm, Trump seemed to have -- he didn`t need all that money for repairs. According to the AP, the real estate tycoon said he didn`t know how much had been spent on repairs, but acknowledged he pocketed some of the money.

Trump transferred funds into his personal account saying that under the terms of this policy you didn`t have to reinvest it.


HAYES: When I speak to you tomorrow night I`ll be in the city of Miami to report on the arrival of Hurricane Irma. It is a return to Miami for All In where today the weather was pleasant with boats still bobbing placidly in Biscayne Bay.

And last year, we traveled the city to report on the conditions that make the city uniquely vulnerable to hurricanes.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Less than 9 percent of Miami-Dade County is greater than 10 feet above sea level.

HAYES: Adding to the problem, most of South Florida is built on porous limestone, which allows water to move around easily and seep up through the ground. Flooding happens often here, and not just when it`s raining.

Seasonal high tides occur when the sun, Earth, and moon align leading to flooding made worse by sea level rise.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You can see that every day when you go into Miami beach, at least in October we will have four or five extreme flooding events when the sky is clear, it`s just coming right up the sewer drains, flooding from seal level rise. That`s a climactic impact that we`re seeing already today.


HAYES: Miami-Dade county today expanded its mandatory evacuation order ahead of Irma. Right now front of mind for Miami residents is getting out. And it is not easy. As of this afternoon about a third of gas stations in the Miami-Fort Lauderdale area were out of fuel. Drivers are facing long lines at the stations that still have gas.

With maximum sustained winds of 175 miles per hour, Irma has already caused heartbreaking devastation in the British Virgin Island of Tortola and elsewhere.

This was the aftermath of the storm on the island of St. Martin where four people have been found dead. Local official says 60 percent of houses are now uninhabitable.

In St. Thomas, video showed the storm arriving with stunning force. And even though it did not take a direct hit, three were killed in Puerto Rico where more than a million people are reportedly now without electricity.

Tonight, Irma is battering Turks and Caicos, which is facing a 15 to 20 foot storm surge as videos from the island show trees barely staying upright.

I`m joined now from Gainesville, Florida by Craig Fugate who has ran FEMA under President Obama and before that coordinated Florida`s response to multiple hurricanes as the state`s director for the emergency management division.

There`s a big mandatory evacuation through wide swaths of coastal Florida. And I know that when we were covering Harvey in Houston there was real concern about Rita and how bad and hard it was for people to get out. What are the challenges in Florida for an evacuation of this size?

CRAIG FUGATE, FORMER FEMA ADMINISTRATOR: Just the sheer number of people and the limited evacuation routes. That`s why we tell people you know you`re evacuating from storm surge, move inland. You only need to go tens of miles. But so many people will try to travel north on very limited highways that part of the reason we have to start evacuating while the sun is shining is to give people plenty of time to reach safe areas.

HAYES: One of the lessons I learned in reporting on Katrina was about how much people`s actions were driven by their economic situation. A lot of people just couldn`t go anywhere. They had no money. It was the end of the month.

How much does that determine whether people can even get out, if they even have a place to go?

FUGATE: Well, that`s why again the local counties and cities work hard getting shelters open outside of the storm surge area using their public transportation, getting people to call and get picked up and moved to a safer location. So, even if you don`t have the money to go to a hotel or motel, shelters are free, transportation is made available, counties running hotlines and trying to get people to call in that need help.

Again, we don`t want to leave anybody behind. But we`re also telling people, hey, when you evacuate take your pets.

Many of the public shelters now are pet friendly. A lot of hotels and motels relax their policies during evacuations. So, it`s really important that people evacuate. There are ways to get help if you need it, but you need to get it now and not wait until it`s too late.

HAYES: That pet point is crucial, because I`ve seen a lot of research to suggest that is one of the driving factors for why people don`t evacuate.

FUGATE: Right. And it`s a lesson we`ve learned. If you noticed during Harvey and previous disasters, when rescue teams are going out, it used to be we wouldn`t pick up the pets. Now the policy is we`ll get the pets as long as they`re not dangerous.

So, we want people to evacuate with their pets. Across the state there are listing on how to get information about where pet friendly shelters are. Hotels and motels that are taking pets. But the key thing is a lot of reasons people come up with not to evacuate are not worth their life. This is the key message, not to evacuate because you and your family have potentially a life threatening situation. And that`s why we`re doing everything we can, that`s why I wanted to be here to communicate on behalf of the entire team it is not something that you can take the luxury of waiting for another forecast when you`re in the evacuation zone, orders are given, time to go. If you need help, call for it. Don`t wait until it`s too late.

HAYES: The current track -- and we see a convergence between the two main models, the European and the American model, really do have a kind of worst case scenario. What are you thinking as someone who has been through Florida hurricanes as you`re looking at this storm track?

FUGATE: We`ve exercised similar events. You can go back to the great Miami hurricane and get an idea of what this kind of a storm is going the do. And that`s why, again, we want people to focus less on the track, more on the forecasted impacts. This is a very large storm and you need to heed those evacuation orders, and that`s going to continue to increase as more areas go under those orders throughout the day tomorrow.

So the track is one thing, but what really want people to do now is focus on -- if you`re in the evacuation zone, move to higher ground. Don`t wait for another update in the forecast.

HAYES: There is not a lot of high ground in Miami-Dade. I mean, my sense is that a huge part of Miami-Dade is going to be both evacuated and probably not habitable if this storm actually continues the way it`s going.

FUGATE: Well, let`s look at the maps before we make very broad inaccurate statements. The counties and the state have done a good job of mapping the most deadly areas to get out of. It doesn`t mean areas don`t get wet, but we try to evacuate where people are most likely to be at risk. And that`s why we used the zones. And it`s very -- you have got to be very careful here when you talk generals, because these are very specific general evacuation zones that we need to get people out of.

HAYES: That`s the evacuation zone map right there for Miami-Dad what`s been ordered. Former FEMA administrator Craig Fugate, thanks so much for bringing us your expertise. And I really appreciate it. Best of luck. Stay safe.

That is All In for this evening.


Copy: Content and programming copyright 2017 MSNBC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2017 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.