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

All in with Chris Hayes, Transcript 9/19/17 DACA protests at Trump Tower & Pelosi Presser

Guests: Eric Swalwell, Renato Mariotti, Lawrence Wilkerson

Show: ALL IN with CHRIS HAYES Date: September 19, 2017 Guest: Eric Swalwell, Renato Mariotti, Lawrence Wilkerson




DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Mr. Manafort who`s by the way -- who`s, by the way, a respected man.

HAYES: More fallout from the Manafort wiretap reports as the President`s personal attorney is sent packing by Senate investigators.

MICHAEL COHEN, DONALD TRUMP`S ATTORNEY: It was a request of the Senate Intel to postpone and I`ll be back.

HAYES: Tonight, the latest on the investigations into Trump and the Russians. Then,

SEN. CHUCK SCHUMER (D-NY), MINORITY LEADER: Simply put, Trumpcare is a sham.

HAYES: New movement in the Republican race to repeal ObamaCare.

SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R), SOUTH CAROLINA: Paul Ryan told me to my face, if you pass it, we pass it.

HAYES: Plus, the President brings his tweetstorm to the U.N.

TRUMP: Rocketman is on a suicide mission for himself and for his regime.

HAYES: And the member of Congress arrested outside Donald Trump`s New York home joins me live when ALL IN starts right now.


HAYES: Good evening from New York, I`m Chris Hayes. As another outlet backs up the explosive report that Paul Manafort was indeed wiretapped before and after last year`s campaign, we are getting a clearer picture of the aggressive tactics that investigators are adopted to get answers in the Russia probe or should I say probes. Because it`s not just Special Counsel Robert Mueller whose agents reportedly picked the lock on Manafort`s front door to search his home and threatened him with an indictment, now, the Senate Intelligence Committee is playing hardball as well, cancelling today a private interview this morning with Michael Cohen, the President`s longtime lawyer and business associate and instead, opting to subpoena him, that is to compel him to come testify in public.

Now, we learned recently about Cohen`s efforts during the Presidential campaign to make a deal on a Trump Tower in Moscow. Working with Felix Sater, a Russian born developer with a criminal history and known mob ties who has worked on past projects with the President. In an e-mail obtained and published by the New York Times, Sater bragged to Cohen about his Kremlin connections telling him among other things, I will get Putin on this program and we will get Donald elected. But that`s not Cohen`s only possible link to the Russia investigation, he and Sater were also behind a back channel plan first reported back in February to end the years-long conflict between the U.K. and Russia on terms favorable to Russia outlining a way for the President to lift sanctions against Russia which is, of course, a major goal of Vladimir Putin.

And as well on the infamous Steel Dossier which alleges long-term cooperation between Trump world and the Russian government. Cohen was named as a go-between said to have met overseas with Kremlin officials in August of 2016. And he`s consistently rejected that claim. This morning Cohen and his attorneys arrived on Capitol Hill for the agreed to a closed- door meeting with the Senate Intelligence Committee staff. But they release text of Cohen`s opening statement. In it, he denied that he and the Trump campaign colluded with Russia. But that release of that statement, that did not sit well with the committee which said it had explicitly asked Cohen not to make any public comments. And after an hour, he was done. The rest of the interview postponed.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Why was it postponed? Why was it postponed?

COHEN: That`s a question you`re going to ask the Senate.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Was it your request to postpone? Was it your request to postpone or was it --

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What were you doing here today?

COHEN: It was a request by the Senate Intel to postpone and I`ll be back and look forward to getting all the information.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What do you tell the President?


HAYES: Now, the Republican and Democratic leaders of the Committee explained in a joint statement that, "we were disappointed that Mr. Cohen decided to preempt today`s interview by releasing a public statement prior to his engagement with Committee staff in spite of the Committee`s request that he refrain from public comment. As a result, we declined to move forward with today`s interview and will reschedule Mr. Cohen`s appearance before the committee in an open session at a date in the near future." The Committee just announced they have now invited Cohen to testify in public on October 25th and if he does not comply, a source tells NBC News, they are ready to use their subpoena power. Congressman Eric Swalwell is a Democratic Member of the House Intelligence Committee which is conducting its own Russia investigation. And Congressman, your reaction to what went down today with Michael Cohen in the Senate?

REP. ERIC SWALWELL (D-CA), INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE: Good evening, Chris. And wouldn`t it be nice if he just cooperated because it`s the right thing to do or because he loves this country and wants to help the Senate and the House understand how we were attacked and whether anyone worked with them? But these guys only understand one way. And that seems to be, you know, really compelling them and forcing them to have to come forward. They only acknowledge contacts with Russia after all of their denials are exhausted and they`re confronted by the press or investigators. And so, if that`s the way it has to be, we`re going to get to the bottom of this no matter, you know, how much they try and duck, hide, distract, obstruct.

HAYES: Are you encouraged by the fact that this is a joint statement by both the Chair, Richard Burr who of course is a Republican and the Ranking Member Mark Warner together about this? There seems to be that that committee is working with a fair degree of consensus at the top between the Chair and the Ranking Member.

SWALWELL: Yes. That is very encouraging and I hope that they are able to bring him, hear from him in public. Again, he only served himself today by issuing a statement before going forward. He didn`t serve the public. He didn`t help the Senate investigation at all. And so, the only way now to find out what really happened is to drag him in there literally under, you know, compulsion from a court.

HAYES: So, is this a thing that happens often? I was -- I was fascinated with how this all went down which was a sort of protracted set of negotiations about under which conditions Michael Cohen would come before that Committee and answer questions from staff and an agreement that he wouldn`t release public statement and then, him essentially, unilaterally jettisoning that agreement. That was also sort of terms that your committee has come to with people that you`re bringing before it?

SWALWELL: Yes, we always see seek to have people come under a voluntary agreement. So that way, you don`t have to you know, use -- go the hard way. You know, the easy way is agree on a date, a time, the parameters and of course, you know, perhaps what is turned over. And that has worked for us with most of the witnesses. And if it doesn`t work, then you have to decide as a committee, do we want to subpoena the person and compel them to come in. So, it`s unfortunate that that`s the case, but again, I think both sides are starting to see who these people really are. Whether it`s the President, his family, his campaign, they are people who don`t want to cooperate. They don`t want to assist in the investigation. And so, the question is, are we curious enough? Do we have the will and the courage to do what`s right and keep going forward?

HAYES: I would like to get your reaction from your perch on the House Intelligence Committee which is, of course, one of the three different bodies that are investigating what happened with the campaign and Russia. To the reporting yesterday that there was a FISA warrant under which Paul Manafort was having his phone conversations tapped and listened to, recorded, presumably and surveilled, and that was during the period late summer into the fall and after the election. What do you make of that?

SWALWELL: Well, considering, Chris, how determined and how sophisticated the attack was that the Russians carried out, I hope that our investigators are just as dogged in pursuing who was responsible. I can`t speak to you know or confirm whether that warrant existed, but you know, getting an electronic surveillance warrants, that has to be signed off by a judge, there has to be a lot of evidence. That`s a -- that`s you know, really a means of last resort to go to that. And the courts will ask what else have you done that justifies us allowing you to do this? So that to me, if it was true, would mean that there was evidence out there.

HAYES: Does it blow your mind a little bit to consider the fact that this is an individual under a fairly rarified form of surveillance, FISA and there`s lots of constitutional questions around how that interacts with U.S. citizenship and the due process protections they have, that a person under warrant like that is speaking to the incoming President of the United States and probably recorded and surveilled.

SWALWELL: You know, the reports that I read on you know, CNN and the New York Times was that it may have been for prior contacts with pro-Russian Ukrainians and you know, whether that`s true or not, we don`t know. But I actually think that Paul Manafort`s prior contacts with Russia and the Ukrainians and Michael Flynn`s prior contacts and you know, Carter Page`s contacts, those weren`t disqualifiers for the President and his team. Those are actually bullet points on the resume. Those leaped off the page, those you know, made them more appealing knowing you know, how the President views Russia and the prior contacts that he had. So I actually think it helped them get the job, not prevented them from keeping it or being in his ear.

HAYES: All right, Congressman Eric Swalwell, thank you as always.

SWALWELL: My pleasure, Chris.

HAYES: For more on where the Russia investigation is headed, let`s bring in Jill Wine-Banks, former Watergate Prosecutor and MSNBC Legal Contributor and Renato Mariotti who is a former Federal Prosecutor. I want to continue on that end on the -- on the reaction to the news about Manafort because there`s a statement from his spokesperson that says the following and I will read it to you and get your reaction. "The U.S. Department of Justice`s Inspector General should immediately conduct an investigation into these leaks and to examine the motivations behind the previous administration`s effort to surveil a political opponent. Mr. Manafort request that the Department of Justice release any intercepts involving him and any non-Americans so interested parties can come to the same conclusion as the DOJ, there is nothing there. Renato, what do you make of that statement?

RENATO MARIOTTI, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: Well, it seems to me like something that typically people who are thinking that they are going to be indicted do which is to point the finger at the prosecution and to try to put them on trial, so to speak. And you know, the same thing was done in, for example, by Dennis Hastert who was the Speaker of the House from here in Illinois, when there was leaks about his investigation, you know, he claimed he was going to dismiss the indictment and you know, he was going to get the remedies. And from a legal perspective, if Manafort was indicted, none of this would result in a dismissal of the indictment or any legal consequences. I think, you know, what he`s doing is he`s complaining that look, he has you now, constitutional rights. He doesn`t want the jury pool tampered and you know, he`s upset that there were leaks. We don`t know where they`re from. They could have been from somebody outside the government, but we don`t know for sure.

HAYES: Jill, Renato is speaking as if it`s all but certain that Manafort will be indicted and indeed the reporting we got from the New York Times yesterday indicates Mueller`s people told him that. Is that your expectation at this point?

JILL WINE BANKS, MSNBC LEGAL CONTRIBUTOR: I only know what I read in the New York Times and it certainly sounds like he has been told that he will be indicted. And there seems to be more than ample evidence for financial crimes at least. We don`t know exactly what was learned on the FISA warrant so we`ll have to wait and see what comes out of that.

HAYES: There`s two directions -- well, a number of directions in which this has been moving obviously. And one those directions is that the news that Mueller has been looking -- has been back and forth with Facebook about their data. Of course, we got the information that ads were paid for, that they confirmed by -- they believe essentially foreign entities, Russian backed entities for campaign ads. Renato, you were writing about what you thought the significance was of Mueller subpoenaing a Facebook content. Why do you think that`s such a big deal.

MARIOTTI: Well, to be clear, just to go, it was actually a search warrant on Facebook. And I think that is significant because what it means is that Mueller actually went to a judge and showed that judge evidence that indicated to the judge that a federal crime had been committed. And this this case the contributions, illegal contributions were made by foreigners using Facebook. And what that tells me is that Mueller is closing in on that as a potential charge. If he does that, all that -- what that means is that there`s potential liability for people in the United States because as long as somebody knew about that, knew about what the Russians were doing and helped them succeed in some way, they are also liable for the crime. And that called is aiding and abetting.

And the reason that`s so -- such a game changer is until now a lot of the things we`ve been talking about are -- you know, like Jill was saying, that you know, these financial crimes or obstruction that occurred here in the United States, here, there`s really a prospect that if Mueller found a time where a United States person here -- you know, someone here, an American had helped the Russians, you can see an indictment with a Russian person`s name on it and an American person`s name in the same indictment, and that`s shocking in a real change.

HAYES: Right. Jill, you know, when I was reading the news yesterday, I was thinking about the psychology in all of this. And I wanted to ask you about this from your work in the Watergate investigation. You know, a lot of this -- part of this is a law and part of this is politics and part of this is kind of psychological enterprise which is how the people who are targets or subjects of the investigation are thinking about how they`re going to cooperate or not cooperate. And I wonder how much you when you were working on the Watergate investigation, how much you guys collectively thought about the impact you were having on potential witnesses and how you conducted yourself and how they would make that determination?

BANKS: I think it is something that is always on the mind of a prosecutor is to use all the tools at your disposal. And sometimes that is a fear factor which is what is being suggested here for Mueller. I think that what he is doing seems to be completely in the bounds of what is ordinary and proper investigative techniques. He is pursuing the right people. Wherever he finds the lead, he`s going and he`s following it where it is takes him. So I think he`s doing an excellent job in figuring out what the truth is. And some of this as we`ve read, Manafort`s FISA warrant goes back long before the campaign and had to do with his representation of Ukrainians. It had nothing to do with the campaign, it just then expanded as we got into more and more. And I think that`s something that can always happen. Once you start looking, you don`t know where it will lead and you have to follow the leads everywhere that they take you. and that`s what Mueller is doing which is quite proper.

HAYES: Yes, you point to what is a big question that`s left unanswered about a reporting which is, if there was this sort of previous FISA warrant that led to the wiretapping of Manafort, what triggered that second round which is going to be a sort of key question I imagined will have answered soon enough. Jill Wine-Banks and Renato Mariotti, thank you.

MARIOTTI: Thank you.

HAYES: Still ahead, the Republican race to repeal ObamaCare gains steam yet again. Here we are again. Senator Cory Booker joins me on that ahead but first, what happened when the President tested out his Twitter material in front of the United Nations? That`s coming up in just two minutes.


HAYES: Today the President of the United States delivered his first major speech to the United Nations or as he put it tonight, he spoke before the countries of the world. And in that speech, Donald Trump was, well, Donald Trump. The President delivering a bellicose, nationalistic, at times contradictory address. The U.N. General Assembly reportedly drafted by hardline aide Stephen Miller. The speech hit a lot of traditional Republican foreign policy notes all be it with a Trumpian twist. A senior administration official telling NBC News, the President "thought about it a few times before then making the decision this morning to include in his remarks his nickname for the leader of the nuclear-armed North Korea, Kim Jung-un."


TRUMP: The United States has great strength and patience, but if it is forced to defend itself or allies, we will have no choice but to totally destroy North Korea. Rocketman is on a suicide mission for himself and for his regime.


HAYES: With me now is retired U.S. Army Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson, former Chief of Staff of the Secretary of State Colin Powell and Journalist and an MSNBC Contributor Hooman Majd, who`s written multiple books about modern Iran and is facilitating that interview with (INAUDIBLE) earlier today I believe it was. Colonel Wilkerson, let me start with you. Your response or your reactions to the President`s speech today, particularly on the issue of North Korea.

LAWRENCE WILKERSON, FORMER CHIEF OF STAFF TO UNITED STATES SECRETARY OF STATE COLIN POWELL: Chris, my first reaction was he read it from the teleprompter. That means at least H.R. McMaster and probably Jim Mattis and John Kelly got a look at the speech and I`m deeply saddened and embarrassed by that fact. That was the most atrocious speech I`ve heard an American President give in any venue. And regard -- with regard to North Korea, I later picked up the news that Secretary Mattis had talked about options, military options, usable against the DPRK that would not endanger Seoul or the citizens of South Korea. I`ve been down that route before principally with the United States Air Force in 2002 and 2003. That is absolute bull. And if Jim Mattis is thinking that he can use military force against North Korea with no repercussions, we`re in deep trouble.

HAYES: There was -- it struck me that the two most important parts of the speech were on North Korea and Iran because, in some ways, those are the sort of the closest to kind of points of crisis. And you have an interesting kind of juxtaposition. In North Korea, there is no framework to deal with their obvious desire and increasing ability to produce nuclear weapons. With Iran, there is, there`s the joint framework. And it looks like the President is trying hard to undo that. Let`s take a listen, I want to get your reaction.


TRUMP: The Iran deal was one of the worst and most one-sided transactions the United States has ever entered into. Frankly, that deal is an embarrassment to the United States and I don`t think you`ve heard the last of it. Believe me.


HOOMAN MAJD, MSNBC CONTRIBUTOR: Well, if we leave aside the obnoxiousness of the speech, I mean, it`s self-defeating. At the end of the day, it`s completely self-defeating because if the intention of the Trump administration is to try to renegotiate the deal or (INAUDIBLE) fix it or nix it, fix it at least, then he`s not going -- he`s not going about it the right way because how is he incentivizing the Europeans who he just insulted by saying they made the worst most embarrassing deal.

HAYES: That`s right. (INAUDIBLE) parties to disagreement.

MAJD: He`s on the audience and he`s telling them you are stupid for having made this deal. And he wants them on board. To renegotiate the deal with the U.N. is to get past the sunset clause as Netanyahu has demanded. And he also then consults the Iranians and then insults the Iranians and puts them in a corner where they will not react positively to any suggestion of renegotiation. If they were going to ever talk about renegotiating or negotiating something on top of the JCPOA, now they are not going to. And we`ll probably going to see a reaction from Hassan Rouhani tomorrow in his speech at the U.N.

HAYES: Colonel, how much -- a lot of this sort of main themes of the -- of the speech were about sort of going it alone and a real emphasis on national sovereignty. I think he said, sovereignty times. And that`s obviously that something that a lot of different world leaders will come before the U.N. and bang the drum on. But often folks that are sort of traditionally more skeptical of the international system built after World War II, the leaders say, China or Vladimir Putin. What did you make of the sort of the sovereignty theme?

WILKERSON: I think it`s very dangerous. And let me just point out something else to pick up on your previous discussion`s remarks. What we are looking at right now is while Trump is pontificating at the United Nations while his case with regard to Mueller and the investigations and the (INAUDIBLE) and others is falling apart as to say he can`t even talk to Moscow because of that, and because of his actions with regard to the JCPOA, we are ignoring -- we`re ignoring what`s happening in Syria. The Syrian army on a Russian amphibious bridge with Hezbollah and RRGC elements and Russian air power backing them across the Euphrates River on Monday and they`re building up their forces on the other side of the Euphrates. That going to put him in direct contention with our forces and those we support. We`re taking our eye off the ball to pontificate at the United Nations. This is very dangerous.

HAYES: Do you think -- what is the nature of whatever back channels that exist between the U.S. and Iran at this point? Because one of the things that happened with the development of this joint agreement was an infrastructure was built up to create conditions for talking that did not exist because of the hostage crisis obviously and because of the lack of diplomatic relations. Those presumably persist. Right?

MAJD: It`s called the joint commission.

HAYES: And I mean, I guess, you know, you have the U.S. side at this saying that they are abiding by the deal, the President clearly making noise that he wants to get out of it. Is there work happening sort of beneath the iceberg to kind of keep things moving forward?

MAJD: Yes. I mean, the Europeans are helping to do that. Mogherini, Federica Mogherini who`s the E.U. Foreign Minister, it puts together the joint commission and they meet every six months. And the U.S. participates in that meeting. But it`s not at of the level of ministers, it`s not on the level of Foreign Ministers and Secretary of State. Tomorrow for the very first time in the Trump administration, Rex Tillerson is meeting with Javad Zarif who is the Foreign Minister of Iran. So that`s the first time there will be direct contact. But in that joint commission which is there and created in the JCPOA to handle any kind of disputes or to just continue the implementation of the deal.

HAYES: Final question Colonel, the rhetoric on North Korea, there was a great piece in the New Yorker by Evan Osnos sort of trying to sort of game out how this rhetoric refracts through North Korea`s understanding of where they are in the relation with the U.S. What is your best guess of how this gets to them?

WILKERSON: North Korea is a cult state. It is the most regimented society in the world. Anyone who (AUDIO GAP) that North Korea won`t fight (AUDIO GAP) with every citizen`s blood is thinking nonsense. And that`s why Jim Mattis`s statements today really disturbed me. I`ve heard those briefings before that we can get 85 percent or 90 percent of their underground facilities with a first strike capability. That`s utter nonsense. If he`s believing that sort of stuff, if he thinks there are military options, we are in trouble.

HAYES: Yes, it`s been 63 years of sort of going through the calculations on the calculations on this Rubik`s Cube this and coming back to the same point as regards American military options on the Korean Peninsula. Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson, Hooman Majd, thank you, both for being here tonight.

MAJD: Thank you.

HAYES: Coming up. A Democratic Congressman arrested at the New York home of Donald J. Trump. Today, Luis Gutierrez joins me live on set to explain ahead. And have you liked our page on Facebook yet? If you haven`t, you`re missing a little experiment tonight. Go check it out.





HAYES: Horrific, terrifying images coming out of Mexico after a 7.1 magnitude earthquake struck the state of Puebla about 80 miles southeast of the capital, destroying buildings and sending people running into the streets. The earthquake hit just hours after drills were held across Mexico City on the very anniversary of that massive earthquake that killed thousands of people back in 1985. Today`s quake was a second to hit that country in the last two weeks. The A.P. is reporting that at least 119 people are dead. Meanwhile, another natural disaster threatening the U.S. territory of Puerto Rico. Hurricane Maria is expected there tomorrow as a dangerous Category 4 or 5 storm. The island hasn`t been hit with a Category 5 for over a century. And tonight, Puerto Rico Public Safety Commissioner is warning people living in flimsy homes to "evacuate" otherwise you`re going to die.

HAYES: For all the talk of President Trump making a deal with Chuck and Nancy, the senate and house minority leaders, to provide legal status enshrined into law to young immigrants after the administration announced an end to DACA, or the Deferred Action of Childhood Arrivals, many immigrant groups remain skeptical which is why about 40 people showed up at Nancy Pelosi`s San Francisco office yesterday to voice their discontent.

And then today, another group showed up outside of the president`s home here in New York to protest his decision to end DACA. 10 people reportedly arrested, including these three U.S. congressmen. One of them, just released from jail, joins me now. Congressman Luis Gutierrez from Chicago.

Why did you get arrested today?

REP. LUIS GUTIERREZ, (D) ILLINOIS: I think it`s important that we bring attention and we keep the focus and we tell everybody around the country mobilize.

Look, the strategy is to be in the courts. We are doing that. We have a legislative strategy. But the most court is the court of public opinion and keeping people.

I like to think as I said this morning, I grew up when it was separate but equal, right. How did I get my rights, because people said, oh will you please let Luis vote? No. Because people protested and put their freedom on the line so that I could have a voice.

HAYES: I mean, you were -- I mean, you were actually arrest and put in the back of a police vehicle.

GUTIERREZ: In the back of the paddy wagon -- all of us were put in the back in little cages.

HAYES: Driven down to central booking.

GUTIERREZ: Driven down to central book 60, 70 blocks.

HAYES: You got a summons? I mean, you are going to come back to New York for a court date?

GUTIERREZ: I have to come back on -- I didn`t know about that, but it`s fine.

HAYES: So, it works.

GUTIERREZ: Yeah, I can`t -- I want to come back to New York and see you and not have an arrest warrant out for me.

HAYES: But here`s the question. I mean, I guess my -- so, you`re doing this because you want to shine a light on this issue. Are you scared that it`s going to disappear off the front pages essentially?

GUTIERREZ: The Muslim ban, we don`t talk too much about it, you know. Transgender community? You know, things -- well, now we are talking about 30 million people losing their health care again, because the Republicans are coming back.

You know, we just have to understand if you talk to the immigrant community and you are part of it every day, you see the fear. You see the trepidation that exists. And it`s hurtful. It`s painful to see that. And I want to say we`re fighting, because one of the things I used to tell Obama is President Obama, win or lose, they want a quarterback. They want somebody to move the ball down.

HAYES: At least get caught trying, as they say in politics.

So, I thought the Pelosi moment was fascinating, because that`s part of a long lineage of protests of Democrats. Barack Obama himself, right, who was sort of protested over deportations and not having DACA and then he did DACA and DAPA.

I had Bernie Sanders on the show. He was responding to your frustration with the deal that Chuck and Nancy cut. I want you to listen to what he said and then respond to it. Take a listen.


SANDERS: I mean, it`s one thing to talk fervently about the issues, but you know what in the Senate, we need 60 votes, OK. And if Luis can get us those 12 Republican votes tomorrow, I think we are ready to move. The goal is to win this thing.


HAYES: So, their argument is there is still a filibuster problem. You still need a bunch of Republican votes to enshrine this into law. What do you say to that?

GUTIERREZ: When we got the majority in 2007, Chris, if you had been with me, and I had gone to the new majority we had in 2007, you know what they told me? Get me 50 Republican votes.

So, what I hear Bernie is the echo, the echo of the Democrats. I know Bernie is an independent, but he sounds like a regular Democrat in the House leadership or in the Senate leadership now.

Well, if you would only get me the votes. No, this is about fighting.

HAYES: Wait, but the fighting -- I hear that, but the fighting, there has to be some strategy, right. So what the outcome of the fight -- so tell me what it is.

GUTIERREZ: OK. 70 republicans didn`t vote for the debt ceiling, didn`t vote for the continuing resolution, and didn`t vote for relief for the Texas hurricane relief in Harvey. Please tell me the last time we approved a budget without overwhelming Democratic support. I can`t remember.

That means they have an operating majority, this majority of 155.

HAYES: So, you`re just saying -- just do not give them the votes in the House?

GUTIERREZ: But, yeah, here`s what I`m saying. I don`t want to close the government down, but if you have a Republican budget with Republican ideals and Republican values that say to Dreamers we are not going to allow you to prosper in this country and feel safe in this country, just -- but we do it, Chris, for Planned Parenthood with lots of pride and I`m proud to stand up with Democrats.

When are we going to do it on immigration?

HAYES: Congressman Luis Gutierrez, thanks for coming by. Nice to see you in person.

GUTIERREZ: Always a pleasure, Chris.

HAYES: Still to come, why Republican governors are now coming out against the latest attempt to repeal and replace the last stand of Obamacare with Senator Cory Booker ahead.

But first tonight`s Thing One, Thing Two up next.


HAYES: Thing One tonight, President Trump`s evolving relationship with the teleprompter. As a candidate, he frequently mocked other candidates and President Obama specifically for using them.


DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I actually said if you are running for president, you should not be allowed to use a teleprompter. No, it`s true. It`s true. It`s so easy, because you don`t know what you are going to get. Look what happened with Obama. He was a teleprompter guy.


HAYES: Later in the campaign, however, Trump himself became a teleprompter guy.


TRUMP: So, I would have known teleprompters, I would have used them. I`ve started to use them a little bit. They`re not bad. You never get yourself in trouble when you use a teleprompter. You know the problem is, it`s too easy? We have a president who uses teleprompters. It`s too easy.


HAYES: It`s not so easy. I mean, I can say this firsthand you still have to be able to read the words correctly. And that is where President Trump`s teleprompter evolution has produced a most curious new maneuver, one that was on display this morning at the U.N.


TRUMP: Our hope is a word and world of proud independent nations.


HAYES: See what he did there?

Thing two in 60 seconds. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HAYES: President Trump almost never speaks in public without reading off a teleprompter or sheet of paper. And with all that practice we`ve noticed the president has developed a little trick or maybe a tick much like a blues guitarists who might improvise around a misplayed note.

Watch what the president does when he misreads his remarks.


TRUMP: We have seen an alarmed and really a very highly alarmed and alarming trend.

Authority and authoritarian powers.

Through their lives and though their lives were cut short.

In stem fields where women have been truly under representative and I guess you can say under represented.

And very importantly, air traffic controllers will highly and this will be highly valued. These are highly valued people. These are amazing people.

Our hope is a word and world of proud independent nations.

Another historic step towards future development and future, with a future, a real future, and I have to say that`s a real future.

What standard, and really if you think of it, when you talk about the great sailors and the great sailors of the world, we have them. What stranded sailor doesn`t feel relief? (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HAYES: The Republican push to gut Obamacare just will not stay dead.

After three GOP Senators in July, John McCain, Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski cast crucial no votes, including a dramatic thumbs down in the wee hours for McCain, many people thought the drive to dismantle the ACA was finally finished.

But here we are, Republicans are trying yet again, and they are using the exact same playbook. A Democratic input, no substantive discussion, and an incomplete report from the CBO.

This time though, Republicans could succeed.

Now Collins appears to be a no, but Murkowski has been very non-committal saying she is, quote, "still looking at the bill." And McCain is saying as little as possible.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Very quickly. Any update on where you stand on Graham- Cassidy?


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Thank you, Senator.


HAYES: But while Republicans say the bill is about state control over health care, today a bipartisan group of governors, the people that run those states, including Republican governors on both Nevada and Ohio, asked Mitch McConnell to kill the bill.

Up ahead, the last stand for Obamacare and what Democrats can do about it with Senator Cory Booker. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HAYES: Democrats now scrambling to defeat the latest Republican attempt to, once again, attempt to dismantle the ACA. But time is very short.

Majority leader Mitch McConnell needs to get the new Graham-Cassidy Bill, as it`s called, through the Senate by the end of this month in less than two weeks.

Democrats say it would be a disaster for millions of people.


SEN. CHUCK SCHUMER, (D) NEW YORK: How about how this affects people? Millions will lose coverage.

No guarantee of preexisting condition, and an end to Medicaid as we know it.

Tens of millions of people could well lose coverage.


HAYES: And joining me now, New Jersey Senator Cory Booker. All right, Senator. You`re there and I`m not. What is -- what`s this looking like at this hour?

SEN. CORY BOOKER, (D) NEW JERSEY: I think everybody needs to know that we`re in a state of peril.

In every version of this Trumpcare that`s been tried to be forced through here in the Senate, I would say this is the one that has me most concerned, most afraid that they are slowly cobbling together the 50 votes that they are going to need, plus Vice President Pence, to get this thing through.

So, what is missing right now is we just need to have more of the voices of Americans. This is not time for indifference, for apathy, for inaction. Really, this is a tremendous threat because actually of all the versions of Trumpcare that I`ve seen, this is probably the worst.

We don`t have a CBO score yet, but it has a lot of the elements of all the other plans that were bad that I think this is going to make this the worst one yet.

HAYES: One of the things they look like they are trying to do essentially to squeeze together the 50 votes is, Lamar Alexander who is engaged in this kind of bipartisan effort with Patty Murray, ranking Democrat on his committee to come up into bipartisan fixes to stabilize the insurance market, just announced today that`s done, that`s dead. It`s over.

Do you take that as a sign they are going to put the squeeze on those members of the Republican caucus and say there is no other way forward but this?

BOOKER: Yeah, first of all, that is a tragedy what happened today because there is a shot clock so to speak. While Republicans are rushing towards the September 30th deadline that they have to push there last of Trumpcare, there is another deadline of insurance companies setting rates, setting premiums based upon the cost sharing payments.

And so now it looks like we`re not going to be doing anything, which is already going to destabilize the marketplace, make insurance companies have to raise prices. So they are already doing things to severely damage not just Obamacare but the lives of millions of Americans.

And now at the same time they are letting that go down, a bipartisan plan where they brought people together, they brought experts in, they have been going through regular order, they are going to get rid of that and bring in this perverse process, another secretive piece of legislation that hasn`t been open to the public for long.

They will try to rush it through with no hearings, no bipartisan conversations, no common work but just try to shove it through on the floor and creating a parallel in a sense for a lot of those Republican Senators that might be on the fence.

HAYES: One of the strangest things about this bill, and I agree with you, in someways it`s the most distinctly astounding of the variations, is this bizarre distributional effect in which it essentially penalizes states that decided to take federal money to expand Medicaid to ensure more of their people.

It punishes them fiscally. It says no, no, no, we`re going to take money from you and gives it to states that chose not to do like that, states that you see there like Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia and Texas.

New Jersey is a state that comes out a loser on this. So, have you had any conversations with Chris Christie or anyone else about what this would mean just for the folks you represent?

BOOKER: Well look, we know it. The Jersey delegation down here is seeing these astonishing numbers. But there is no fairness in this.

You know, look, we`ve had governors already come out that represent 80% plus of the American population saying don`t do this.

But this is one of the most -- the insults to the tremendous injury that`s being done which says hey, we`re going to try to take care of some of these red state senators so they are not hurt as bad. They`re still going to be hurt. People in their state will lose protections against being denied insurance over preexisting conditions. They will still see limits in gutting of Medicaid. They will see the essential benefits package protections be taken away.

But now unfortunately, they are trying to say we`ll make it less bad for you so please come on board. We`ll try to take care in a very partisan manner Republican senators.

HAYES: All right. Senator Cory Booker of New Jersey. Thanks for making time tonight, Senator.

BOOKER: Thank you very much.

HAYES: Alright, E.J. Dionne Jr. and Norman Ornstein are coauthors of a new book, One Nation Under Trump: A Guide for the Perplexed, the Disillusioned, the Desperate, and the Not-Yet Deported.

They join me now. One of the themes in the book and something that both of you have been writing about is sort of the nature of the Republican party even before the Trump era and Trump as the apotheosis.

It seems to me Norm that the way they have gone about this entire health care debate, if you can call it that, has epitomized how much those norms have degraded aside from Trump.

NORMAN ORNSTEIN, CO-AUTHOR, ONE NATION UNDER TRUMP: After all of the horrors that we`ve seen in the past, we haven`t seen anything like this before.

The contempt that Mitch McConnell has shown for the way the Senate has operated in the past, the contempt that all of his colleagues have for all the elements of the regular order just blown apart and we have to look not just at the McConnells of the world but at the Lamar Alexanders who have started to do bipartisan stuff and then under pressure from the leader dropping.

This precedes Trump and Trump-ism, but it`s a core part of it and we`ve got a lot of it in our book.

HAYES: The Lamar Alexander move today struck me as particularly cynical, because the idea was, okay, fine, we`re throwing in the cards on this ridiculous thing. John McCain giving his thumbs down. Back to regular order.

And they had this one hearing where they just did the thing you do when you legislate. People came forward, and there was a lot of consensus on how to fix the insurance exchanges. And today Lamar Alexander comes and says, we`re done with that so that they can squeeze the people in their caucus.

E.J. DIONNE, CO-AUTHOR, ONE NATION UNDER TRUMP: One of the points we make in our book is that this a very long deterioration. If you go back to the Lamar Alexander who was governor of Tennessee, this is a guy who did deal with Democrats, who was trying to get stuff done. And now you`re seeing him forced into this position.

And Trump is the product of this. Trump-ism is the product of this, and on this health care bill, they had since midsummer, that bill went down and they said all right, you know, McCain, Senator McCain said we need hearings.

They had a lot of time to do this. They did none of it. They are shoving it out there, and it`s about the collapse of norms. It`s also about Trump not keeping his promises to working class people, because the people that will get hurt by this are the Trump constituency.

HAYES: What is your theory of the case for why they are pushing this so hard?

For a while it was they need to get the tax cuts to make this work but Graham-Cassidy actually bizarrely keeps a bunch of the taxes in place. It doesn`t give them nearly the tax cuts they started with the house side.

I don`t think there is a lot of political upside to doing this. They will shove the entire health care system off a cliff. Why are they doing it?

ORNSTEIN: So, two things. The first is they are responding to perhaps 25% of the population, and that 25%, many of whom as E.J. said would be hurt are still furious that they had promised for eight years to repeal Obamacare and they have done nothing.

So they are desperate to do this but also desperate to get a victory.

Paul Ryan said over and over again, we have the most productive Congress in modern history.

It is bizarre because this Congress has done next to nothing and now they are throwing the people over the side -- they are throwing any semblance of policy over the side just to get a victory. That makes them very much like Trump.

HAYES: An interesting twist here today, because part of this is a kind of policy nihilism, right?. At the end the policy doesn`t seem to matter to people. This bill they are pushing, people should know this, the day after the budget window ends, 2026, all the funding just blows up.

There is nothing. Nothing. All goes away.

And maybe you guys will figure it out then but like, that`s a massively irresponsible thing to do.

DIONNE: And it`s very much in keeping with a Trump who really doesn`t seem to care about what the policy is...

HAYES: At all.

DIONNE: As long as he can call it a win. If you saw what he did on DACA. One day he is sort of getting rid of the program for Dreamers. By the next day he is saying, well, I`ll rethink this. A few days later he`s negotiating with Schumer and Pelosi. And then he`s still sending out tweets to his base saying, well, I`m the old Trump.

HAYES: We`ll build walls.

DIONNE: Yeah. It`s about appearance. It has nothing to do with policy.

HAYES: To what extent do you think the amount of organizing and citizen activation we`ve seen has mattered in this era?

ORNSTEIN: I think it is extremely important and a third of the book is devoted to where we go from here and how we do it. We believe now that Trump has given a jolt to the system that is activating all kinds of people.

This farce is doing it even more, and if we can keep this up, we can get back our country and make it as the title says one nation again, instead of the divided and racially driven politics that we`ve seen in the last few years and especially the last year.

DIONNE: And the Obamacare repeal efforts were beaten because of an unprecedented degree of organization, not only in Democratic districts, but a lot of Republicans went home and discovered there were a lot of people in their districts who did not want to repeal Obamacare.

HAYES: And right now people are thinking about Lisa Murkowski, who could be the sort of pivotal vote, and what she`s hearing from her constituents and the hug that she got somewhat ironically when she landed back in Alaska after being one of those three no votes last time.

E.J. Dionne and Norman Ornstein, thank you for your time.

That`s All In for this evening. The Rachel Maddow Show starts right now.

Good evening, Rachel.


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.