Show: ALL IN with CHRIS HAYES Date: February 25, 2019 Guest: Hassan Zuvareei, Christina Greer, Betsy Woodruff, Marcy Wheeler
STEVE KORNACKI, NBC NEWS NATIONAL POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: We will see if Warren can reverse that or if she will end up ruining the day that Bernie Sanders decided to run again. That`s HARDBALL for now. "ALL IN" with Chris Hayes starts right now.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CHRIS HAYES, MSNBC HOST: Tonight on ALL IN.
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I just start kissing them. It`s like a magnet.
HAYES: Shades of the Access Hollywood tape in a brand-new accusation against the president.
TRUMP: And when your star they let you do it. You can do anything.
HAYES: Tonight, the first new accusation against Donald Trump as president and the attorney for the newest accuser joins me live. Then, Elizabeth Warren changes the game.
SEN. ELIZABETH WARREN (D), MASSACHUSETTS: Corruption is a cancer on our democracy.
HAYES: Tonight, my exclusive interview with Elizabeth Warren on her campaign play to swear off big-money fundraising. Plus, why what`s left out of the latest Manafort filing could mean trouble in Trump world.
PAUL MANAFORT, FORMER CHAIRMAN, TRUMP CAMPAIGN: That`s obviously what our position is.
HAYES: And as the White House plays both sides again.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Do yourself believe in climate ring I believe there are signs that there -- both, on both sides that are accurate.
HAYES: The growing urgency for climate action on the left.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Fire, this is an emergency in this country.
HAYES: When ALL IN starts right now.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: Good evening from New York I`m Chris Hayes. Tonight, a staffer on the Trump 2016 presidential campaign has come forward to become the 16th woman to accuse Donald Trump of unwanted sexual contact. Alva Johnson was a Trump campaign staffer in Florida. That`s her on the day of the alleged incident.
She claims in a new lawsuit that then-candidate Trump quote forcibly kissed her as he exited an R.V. in August of 2016. Johnson says she turned away from Trump as he tried to kiss her on the lips that he ultimately kissed her on the side of her mouth. This is the first sexual misconduct accusation against the president since he became the president. It`s the first alleging misconduct while he was a candidate. It is also the first accusation be made by a woman who worked on Trump`s campaign.
Johnson who in addition to suing Trump is also suing the Trump campaign alleging she was underpaid because of her race and gender, says the incident took place about six weeks before the release of the Access Hollywood tape in which Trump in the Year 2005 can be heard boasting that he can do the very thing he`s been accused of doing.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: You know, I`m automatically attracted to beautiful. I just started kissing them. It`s like a magnet. Just kiss. I don`t even wait. And when you`re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything.
BILLY BUSH, RADIO HOST: Whatever you want.
TRUMP: I can do any of that.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: Johnson did not speak out at the time that tape became public but told The Washington Post she was stunned when the tape came out. "I felt sick to my stomach. That was what he did to me." Two women who say they were present for the alleged kiss, Melania Trump chief of staff Stephanie Grisham and former Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi told NBC News that they did not see it take place. Bondi flat-out called the allegation false.
In addition, the director of trumps Florida campaign Karen Giorno told the Post the allegation was ridiculous saying that absolutely did not happen. In a statement, Sarah Sanders also rejected the allegation "this accusation is absurd on its face. This never happened and is directly contradicted by multiple highly credible eyewitness accounts."
Johnson`s boyfriend, mother, and stepfather confirmed to the Post that Johnson told them about the alleged kiss on the day it took place, and a Florida Attorney told posted Johnson had approached him about the alleged incident just two months later.
Joining me now is Hassan Zuvareei. He`s the attorney for Alva Johnson. Good to have you here. Good evening, Chris. Why filed this lawsuit now?
HASSAN ZUVAREEI, LAWYER OF ALVA JOHNSON: Well, so Ms. Johnson actually tried to come forward and was prepared to come forward shortly after the Access Hollywood tape came out. It was at that moment that she was able to contextualize what happened to her. I think at first she was very confused. She knew it was inappropriate but she didn`t really know what it meant until Mr. Trump told her exactly what it meant.
He told her and he told the rest of the country that this was a pattern, this was his modus operandi, this was part of his way of sexually assaulting women. And so once she saw that, she left the campaign, she never came back. She hired an attorney. She moved out of campaign housing and she began the steps to bring a lawsuit.
HAYES: This is two months after the incident when the tape comes out. You`re saying that is the precipitating incident for her to break with the campaign.
ZUVAREEI: That`s right. The Access Hollywood tape.
HAYES: I will say that she had very fond things to say. I`m not saying this means that she`s not telling the truth here but I do want to put on the record that she did say fun things about the president back in a May 2017 radio interview. Take a listen to what she had to say.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ALVA JOHNSON, FORMER STAFFER, TRUMP CAMPAIGN: He is more incredible in person than I think than you would even think as you see him on T.V. He`s just the nicest guy. He really loves this country. He loves his family. He treats everyone as if they`re a part of his family.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: Is that reflect the way she feels about the president?
ZUVAREEI: Absolutely not, Chris. Keep in mind -- so after she found the attorney or thought she had found an attorney, he declined to move forward with the case for business reasons even though he believed in the merits of her claim. And at that point shortly afterwards, candidate Trump became President Trump. And at that point she was terrified and she was very scared of coming forward, and she decided not to come forward.
And as a victim, as many victims are terrified she was as well. And she decided to go along to get along, to shut up, to not talk about it, and to move forward with her life which at that point included her life as a campaign advocate.
HAYES: The allegations are that this was done in a public -- in public. Essentially, her boss, the boss of the campaign just to forcefully kiss her in the midst of what is a day of public campaigning.
ZUVAREEI: Yes -- look, again, that`s his M.O. He did it to Cathy Heller at Mar-a-Lago in 1997. He did it to a Miss USA candidate on camera, so yes that`s exactly what he did and it`s consistent with his behavior in the past.
HAYES: She -- did she sign an NDA as the condition of her employment in that campaign?
ZUVAREEI: She signed an NDA purportedly as a condition of her employment and we intend to fight that NDA. We believe it`s unconscionable and unenforceable.
ZUVAREEI: Well, it`s so over brought (AUDIO GAP) not just the President, his entire family, his grandchildren. They`re --
ZUVAREEI: Yes. It stifles all kinds of speech. I mean, it`s so broad. I`ll provide a copy for you if you`d like to see it. And you can see how he`s tried to abuse it. I mean, he`s tried to shut down people who are working in the White House. He`s tried to shut down people who have made other complaints about him. And in the line of work that I`m involved in where I fight corporations every day, they try to shut people down and shut people up, that`s what we do. We fight these sorts of abusive agreements.
HAYES: There`s another aspect to the lawsuit aside from this allegation of unwanted sexual contact by the president which has to do with the way that she was paid on the campaign. Tell me what is that part of the lawsuit.
ZUVAREEI: That`s right. So there are two aspects to that. She was paid less than comparable men who were working on the campaign and she was paid less than comparable white people who were working on the campaign. With respect to her gender claims, she`s actually bringing that claim on behalf of all women who worked on the Trump campaign.
And just as an example there was a kid straight out of high school, white kid straight out of high school, a teenager who was brought on the campaign as an intern, and after he graduated from high school was making more than she was.
HAYES: So this is a federal race and sex discrimination lawsuit claim in federal court?
ZUVAREEI: That`s right.
HAYES: What is her thinking about her role in that campaign now? What does she feel about being some small part of getting this man elected president and what does she think about it now?
ZUVAREEI: This has been the most difficult thing for her. Feeling like she helped to legitimize this man and help him become the President of the United States. After what happened in Charlottesville, when she saw I`m talking about there being fine people on both sides, after what happened at the Mexican border, where he saw -- where she saw him separating children from their -- from their parents, and then when she saw him mocking the #MeToo movement.
Those things I think have made a big impact on her and she feels very responsible. And I think part of coming forward now is to try and redeem herself for what she feels guilty about which is her role in having Donald Trump elected president.
HAYES: All right, Hassan Zuvareei who is the lawyer for Alva Johnson who has filed suit in federal court over what she says is unwanted sexual contact by the President of the United States while she worked on his campaign. Thank you so much for making some time tonight.
ZUVAREEI: Thank you, Chris.
HAYES: The latest allegation against Donald Trump is a reminder of the enormous body of sexual misconduct allegations that exist against the man who is now the President of the United States.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JESSICA DRAKE, TRUMP ACCUSER: When we entered the room he grabbed each of us tightly in a hug and kissed each one of us without asking permission.
MINDY MCGILLIVRAY, TRUMP ACCUSER: I feel the little you know, this little grab. It`s like you know, you`re feeling like a little cheek, like a little cheek lift almost, and I stand up really tall. I`m shocked in a moment. And I look -- and I turn around and I look at him and he doesn`t look at me. He doesn`t want to make eye contact with me.
JESSICA LEEDS, TRUMP ACCUSER: Somehow another, the armrest in in the seat disappeared and it was a real shock when all of a sudden his hands were all over me.
KRISTIN ANDERSON, TRUMP ACCUSER: The person on my right who unbeknownst to me at that time was Donald Trump put their hand up my skirt. He did touch my vagina through my underwear, absolutely.
JILL HARTH, TRUMP ACCUSER: He pushed me up against the wall and had his hands all over me and tried to get up my dress again and I had to physically say what are you doing? Stop it.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: Donald Trump has dismissed all the women who accused him, everyone as liars and suggested some were not attractive enough for him to assault.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: One came out recently where I was sitting alone and at some club. I was sitting alone by myself like this. And then I went -- to somebody.
Every woman lied when they came forward to hurt my campaign. A total fabrication. All of these Liars will be sued after the election is over.
When you looked at that horrible woman last night, you said, I don`t think so. I don`t think so. Whoever she is, wherever she comes from, the stories are total fiction. I was sitting with him on an airplane and he went after me on the plane. Yes, I`m going to go after her. Believe me, she would not be my first choice, that I can tell you.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: Joining me now Christina Greer, Associate Professor of Political Science at Fordham University and Betsy Woodruff, Politics Reporter for The Daily Beast. Christina, you know, it occurred to me as I read this story today that A, in another context, it would be enormous world stopping news if a campaign staffer had said that getting off a bus, Barack Obama had forced himself a kiss on her.
In the middle of the two years of the administration, I think we all agree that would be a (INAUDIBLE). It is not that kind of story partly because I think there -- it is priced in an assumptions about how the president behaves.
CHRISTINA GREER, ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR OF POLITICAL SCIENCE, FORDHAM UNIVERSITY: Well, I mean, we`ve been dealing with these assaults by Donald Trump just as citizens --
HAYES: Alleged, I must say.
GREER: No, when I say assaults, I mean, just the constant barrage. Yes, double entendre. The constant barrage of him just -- and his brutish behavior. So yes, there are 16 women who have allegedly accused -- you know, accused Trump of alleged assault but there`s so much more. Every day it`s a fire. I mean, you have to put this show together. Every single day there`s something new and so it`s this onslaught, where e can`t really focus on sort of one issue because each day something else happens.
And so what really bothers me though is that this is clearly a pattern. For those of us who live in New York, we`ve known about this pattern for decades actually, and he seems to be Teflon Don, right? And we`ve seen what happened to Dr. Blasi Ford where she is not back at work. She is using her private funds and savings to hire her own security. We know that the supporters of Donald Trump are highly aggressive and some of them unstable as far as you know, going after these women.
So for some of them, it`s a safety issue. And he encourages that. I mean, we`ve seen this time and time again with the way he talks about his accusers.
HAYES: You know, Betsy, it struck me the singular role that NDA`s play and Trump world which has followed him into the White House. Clifford Sims who just wrote the book now engaged in a legal dispute with the White House over getting out of those NDA`s which the president in unprecedented fashion has used to lock up almost everyone he comes into contact with.
BETSY WOODRUFF, POLITICS REPORTER, THE DAILY BEAST: That`s right. This story is sort of the extension of two lifelong trends for Trump. The first of course being allegations of sexual misconduct and assault, and the second being efforts to sort of weaponize the American legal system to force people not to be open about their encounters with him and about their work with him.
One thing the Daily Beast reported a couple days ago is the fact that the Trump administration has actually forced interns to sign NDA`s and it hasn`t let these interns according to our reporting keep the copies of the NDA`s that they signed. In other words, if you`re a young -- perhaps a college student trying to get started in the White House trying to get your foot in the door in politics and you want to work in this White House the prospect of financial ruin will be hanging over your head because of these NDAs.
Now, to be crystal clear, it is very much unclear whether or not these NDAs are illegal and whether they can actually be enforced in court. There`s a very interesting argument that First Amendment rights for these federal employees can`t be enforced because the NDA rather than the president being the person they`re making the commitment to, they`d be making the commitment to the United States as a country.
Anyway, the legal side of this is really interesting. And if an intern decides to try to sue them of that NDA, it will -- it will be fascinating to watch. But this is just Trump`s M.O. This is how he works.
HAYES: Yes. And you heard the attorney from Miss Johnson saying they think it`s totally null and void. But there`s another part of this. You talked about Teflon Don and I think you know, we`ve seen -- you know, this amazing thing about the equilibrium of the approval rating right? Like no new facts change things that much in one direction or another. It`s not like people can be converted to thinking --
GREER: Well, Chris, if you were with him when he came down a gold escalator and says Mexicans are rapist, like you`re not moving down.
HAYES: But there`s also to me, there`s a lesson almost for the rest of our politics about the value of shamelessness which is essentially -- I mean Ralph Northam right now is still the governor of Virginia, right? And there was this moment where when the blackface came out and people thought well, obviously he got to go. And one of the things that I think Trump has shown for all kinds of political and public figures is if you don`t bow to the shame and you just plunge ahead, maybe you can just weather anything.
GREER: The most dangerous man in the world has no shame. And that means he will not be moved by anything, right? Not by embarrassment, not by embarrassment to his family, not by embarrassment to his wife because he has no shame. And for those of us who are from New York, we know -- the interesting thing that Betsey talks about this NDAs is that we also know that Trump has weaponized the legal system in a sense that he says he`s going to sue people.
But he also always reneged on deals that he makes with other people and his go-to line is will sue me, right? Yes, I know we`ve made an agreement where I`m supposed to pay $50,000, I`ll only pay you $25,000. But if you want you`re other $25,000 sue me. Spend $25,000 to get your $25,000.
HAYES: That`s right. And there is, Betsy, there is no one probably in American public life as litigious who has been as in many lawsuits on both ends as Donald Trump which is part of another part of his lifelong M.O.
WOODRUFF: Right. There`s no doubt. And an interesting you know, factor in the American legal system is that this type of civil litigation, your ability to be successful in it is often contingent on how much money you have. Hiring lawyers to represent you for these civil suits, some of which can drag on for years before resolution, just costs a ton of money. And this is a tool that Trump doesn`t -- Trump is not breaking new ground here in the way that he uses the legal system, although he certainly is a quite innovative and enthusiastic about it.
But the reality is that many Americans have trouble when they`re -- when they have a choice between do we stay quiet or do I go to try to fight for the right to say what I believe is true and that people need to know. And that`s part of the reason that Trump has been able to use this tool so well is that he`s had the financial resources to essentially use law fair to go after his credits.
HAYES: Yes, I`m just sort of -- I`m sort of processing the idea of intern -- White House interns locked up behind NDA which is -- it just early insane idea. Christina Greer and Betsy Woodruff, thank you both.
Senator Elizabeth Warren will be here live to discuss her announcement today that she is swearing off big-money fundraisers. That`s ahead. And my next guest says Robert Mueller`s latest Manafort filing may be an indication of bigger things to come. Marcy Wheeler will explain why right after this.
HAYES: After delay Friday night, prosecutors working for Robert Mueller finally filed a sentencing memo in one of two cases against the president`s campaign manager Paul Manafort. This was the one in Washington D.C. That`s where a judge just ruled that Manafort violated his plea deal by lying to investigators. And the sentencing memo which is unsealed on Saturday is more notable for what it leaves out than what it includes.
While previous filings by Mueller`s office have contained what appeared pretty intentional hints about the probe`s trajectory, revealing for example that Roger Stone`s outreach to WikiLeaks in 2016 "was directed by high ranking individuals in the campaign. The Manafort sentencing memo that we got on Saturday covers no new ground.
Instead of shedding light on the central mystery of Manafort`s contacts with his Russian-Ukrainian henchmen Konstantin Kilimnik during the campaign which according prosecutors quote go very much the heart of the Mueller investigation, the memo sticks with information already in the public record. It skates over Manafort`s lies to investigators mainly dealing with his illegal lobbying work for Ukraine. Though we don`t know what`s hiding under roughly a full page of redactions.
And then conflicting reports on the status of the investigation, it`s hard to know how to interpret this latest public move by the special counsel. No one has been following this more closely than journalist Marcy Wheeler who writes about the Mueller probe on her blog emptywheel.net going over every document with a fine-tooth comb and who`s got a theory for why this latest memo holds its cards so close to the vest, namely that it shows Mueller still has another hand left to play.
Marcy, I read what you`ve been writing about this. What is your sort of main takeaway from the document that we got on Saturday?
MARCY WHEELER, JOURNALIST: Well, Mueller has made accusations of lying against five of Trumps associates George Papadopoulos, Mike Flynn, the draft room Corsi plea, Roger Stone, and Michael Cohen. And every single one of them as you know, it describes other roles on the campaign. It describes dates. It quotes directly from e-mails. And both in this in sentencing hero -- memo that we got on month on Saturday but also in all of the breach negotiation, the breached discussions going back to months before that, we got none of that.
And so at the time when there`s a big question about whether or not Mueller is going to be able to report out what he discovered, that`s the first time he`s withholding those details. So I don`t really know what to make of it, but he had an opportunity on Saturday to show his hand and he didn`t show his hand. So for the first time, he`s did not disclosing those details.
HAYES: Right, because he`s made -- I mean, what you -- what you sort of picked up on is there`s a sort of affirmative decision about how many details to include and he seems to be making affirmative decisions to withhold things in this document and a few of the others that he has not made in the past.
WHEELER: Right and at the core of the breach discussion was this August 2nd, 2016 meeting between Manafort and Konstantin Kilimnik where Manafort dealt Kilimnik 75 pages of polling data and at the same time discussed a peace deal for Ukraine which is -- which was obviously also a sanctions relief deal.
And so we don`t get any of those details. Those details came from Paul Manafort and to some degree the judge. They don`t come from right Mueller in this case but that -- but that`s the story. That`s like the gut of the question of whether or not Trump and his campaign were conspiring with the Russians.
HAYES: You know, and you just mentioned 75 pages someone casually, but I had not seen that number anywhere in the reporting and you sort of go through the document and you find that basically in a footnote by one of Manafort`s own lawyers filings, they say how long the polling data is and it`s 75 pages in at least the attachment that they gave to the court, is that right?
WHEELER: Yes. So it`s included as a declaration to what the government presented back in January and Manafort`s lawyers in their very last memo which is probably why no one noticed this, they`re like here`s the e-mail that Manafort sent to Rick Gates saying print this out.
HAYES: Print this out. Right.
WHEELER: And print this out so we know that the exhibit. And then it says here`s the pages of the data that we`re all discussing. It`s actually 76 pages. I`ve been corrected on that, but it`s at least 75 pages long. So it`s a chunk of polling data. It wasn`t just you know top lines or something like that.
HAYES: Which does seem material to this right? Because as you said, this sort of question that had been hinted at by Mueller`s lawyers in the breach conversation about going to the heart of, what are they doing in this cigar bar on this night meeting with this guy during the campaign printing out polling data and giving to him. And the idea that Manafort`s own lawyers are copping to the fact that what they gave them was like a big hefty chunk of whatever it was.
WHEELER: And their -- I mean, his lawyers also say -- I mean, they kind of go back and forth on how they`re explaining it, but they also say it was so complex and so focused that I don`t understand it. And so the judgment came in case Amy Berman Jackson is like that`s the point right?
HAYES: Right. And so her discussions about why it was material are actually really interesting. But Mueller isn`t saying that. Mueller has been silent about what that August 2nd, 2016 meeting is. We know it`s central to the investigation. He just isn`t going to tell us what it means.
HAYES: And there`s -- and the last question I guess is what -- I mean, there has been so much about when it`s going to end. There are sources at NBC News, congressional sources and others who have said that it`s wrapping up soon. Other organizations have reported the same. The Special Counsel`s office pushback and said no, not next week. What do you make of all that?
WHEELER: I have no idea. I mean --
HAYES: Good. Well, that`s a nice answer because that`s how I feel too.
WHEELER: Yes. I mean, I have no idea. I mean, there`s obviously investigative things we`re waiting to come in like the mystery appellant that is before the Supreme Court. And there you know, there`s like three or four other pieces that we know have yet to come in. But yes, I`m hearing like you are that we`re really close. I just don`t know whether that meeting is a week from Monday or mid-March.
HAYES: Right. All right, Marcy Wheeler, thank you so much. Coming up, Senator Elizabeth Warren on her pledge to shut down big donor access to her presidential campaign. She joins me to talk about that next.
2030 CHRIS HAYES, ANCHOR, MSNBC NEWS: Senator and Democratic presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren just blew up her fundraising operation, swearing off big ticket fundraising events and calls to wealthy donors in favor of the Wall Street Journal reports of pay what you can events, as a major departure from the usual presidential campaign.
Here to talk about the decision and others in her campaign, Democratic Senator Elizabeth Warren. Senator, what - what caused this decision, what - what does it mean for you?
SEN. ELIZABETH WARREN (D), M.A.: So look, we`ve got a problem in democracy right now, and that is that money just has too much influence in Washington. And we have a chance right now in a Democratic primary, we`re in a primary, it`s Democrats against Democrats, to say here`s how we`re going to do this.
We`re going to build from the grass roots. We`re actually going to build a foundation for the Democratic Party that is really about face to face, person to person, neighbor to neighbor people who are engaged in this campaign, whether they can give five - 50 bucks or thousands of dollars.
What we care about is that we have a whole movement of engaged people who are going to help us get elected, not just to the White House, but help us take Congress, help us take state houses, help us take the governor`s mansions and help us have the momentum we`re going to need to make the changes once we`re elected.
This is about how we build real change and I`m excited about it.
HAYES: So here`s my question, you`ve been - you`ve been in politics for a little while, you`ve just recently re-elected.
WARREN: That`s right, one Senate term.
HAYES: And during that time - right, one Senate term, right. So - and during that time you have done - you`ve done calls to wealthy donors, you`ve done big ticket fundraisers, you`ve put together a pretty good war chest, I think about $11 million that you had amassed.
What does that say about what you were doing before? This is the right way to do it now, why now and why not before?
WARREN: So look, I`ve never actually been in a deeply competitive primary, I get it. Republicans come to the table armed to the teeth. They`ve got all of their donors, their wealthy, wealthy donors.
They`ve got their super PACs, they`ve got their dart money, they got everything going for them. And I`m just going to be blunt, I do not believe in unilateral disarmament. We`ve got to go into these fights and we got to be willing to win these fights.
HAYES: So this just applies to the primary, like were to get the nomination or anyone else who gets the nomination like just raise all the money you can however you can.
WARREN: Yes, but here`s what I want you to see that`s different about it, Chris, think about the difference once we`re down to the two candidates. If the Democrats have spent the next year in a primary building this thing face to face, person to person, neighbor to neighbor across the country, think of the kind of foundation that we have laid down so that when we`re really up against it in the general election, it`s not just money to fund television ads, it`s all the folks who will do the door knocking, it`s all the folks who will make the phone calls, it`s all the folks who will reach out to their network.
Because you know how we`re going to win in 2020? It`s going to be big, it`s going to be people who voted for Donald Trump last time around, it`s going to be people who haven`t voted at all, it`s going to be people who see a vision and a way to make this democracy work, not just for the rich and the powerful but make this democracy work for everyone.
HAYES: Final question on this and then I want to ask a few other questions about some stuff that is happening in the campaign proposal you put forward. But for this (ph) final question, I guess the question is how much is this an either or, right, there are campaigns that are able to build both a sort of that kind of grassroots fundraising machinery and also wealthy donors and also do big ticket fundraising.
What does it mean for a candidates` time? Why - why make this sort of decision?
WARREN: Well see that`s the real point, the best estimates are that most candidates for office are spending about 70 percent of their time with millionaires and billionaires, spending it behind closed doors at fancy cocktail receptions and private dinners in mansions.
Let me tell you what I`m going to do tonight, I`m going to call time tonight. You know what call time is.
HAYES: I do know what call time is, it`s -
WARREN: This is when you call and say thank you.
HAYES: -- it gives me a stomach ache and I don`t even have to do call time.
WARREN: Well I am doing call time tonight and tomorrow night and the next night. But here`s the deal, the people I`m calling to say thank you to, I`m going to call not based on how much money they kicked in, I`m just going to pick these numbers up randomly and I`m going to call people and say thank you very much for being part of this, thank you for going to elizabethwarren.com, signing up whether you signed up for five bucks or 25 bucks or 50 bucks, thank you for volunteering, because that`s how we get a chance to build a democracy.
You know, Chris, I`m only going to come this way once as a first time candidate for president, I want to run a campaign that`s based on ideas, that`s based on principles, that`s based on restoring democracy and I think this is a way to do that. Join us.
HAYES: So to segue to that, you have a very ambitious child - universal childcare proposal, your campaign put out I think about a week ago if I`m not mistaken. And I want to ask this question, so there are - so let`s say you view the problem, which I think is obviously a problem that parents, particularly women do not have access to childcare.
It hurts the female labor force participation, it`s an incredible financial burden. So there`s two different ways you can imagine about solving that problem. One is universal child care that you stand up and sort of accredit through the federal government, which is - looks like what you`re proposing.
The other would be just like give people a tax credit, give them a childcare tax credit and then they could go out there into the marketplace and find it. Why did you choose your path?
WARREN: So I chose it for a couple of reasons, the first one is it`s the way to get real money into it for everyone. This is childcare - universal childcare and I should say early learning. It`s an investment from zero to five in our future.
And so it`s about childcare for all our kids, but it`s also about putting the money into early learning, because we have learned that nickels spent on two year olds and three year olds and four year olds so they`re ready to go to kindergarten and ready to learn pays off many, many, many times over through the years.
So what this permits us to do is to have enough money, enough resources and then go straight in to the communities and the providers, the non-profits, the towns and cities that want to do this and say here are the standards, if you`ll meet those standards, we`ll make sure there`s money available.
And by the way, we`ll also make sure that the childcare providers who are taking care of our most precious resource get paid like public school teachers. We`ll even put some money in to help them bring up the standards so that happens.
So think of this, Chris, not just as could your kids get parked in front of a TV set and at least be safe for a few hours, it`s really about an investment in our children so they have the best possible start.
This is how we build a real future in which not just the children of rich people but the children of everyone get a real chance to build lives that are good.
HAYES: There are two big sort of domestic policy proposals your campaign has unveiled. You`ve got a variety of positions, but this and the wealth tax. And this is a question I`ve been asking every candidate, you - let`s say you get elected and let`s say by some sort of political miracle frankly that the Democrats have both the House and the Senate maybe even by a healthy margin in the Senate, what`s your first big domestic legislation, the first big bill that President Warren moves?
WARREN: Anti-corruption, the problem we`ve got in Washington right now is that money is influencing basically every decision that goes on. So whatever brings you to the table to say I care about what`s happening in Washington, whether it`s climate change that`s baring down on us, whether or not it`s student loan debt that you can`t pay, whether or not it`s housing that`s unaffordable, whether or not it`s childcare, whether or not it`s a criminal justice system that works great for those who are running private prisons but not for people who`s lives are being destroyed, whether it`s prescription drugs, I guarantee you every one of those crosses through the intersection of the influence of money.
And when you`ve got a government that`s working great for the rich and the powerful and not working for anyone else, it`s corruption and we need to call it out. So I`ve put together - it`s a big bill because it`s a big problem - but it has the features we need to just beat back some of the influence of money.
End lobbying as we know it, force the United States Supreme Court to have to follow basic ethics rules, stop the revolving door between Wall Street and Washington. Oh and here`s one, everybody who runs for federal office has to put their tax returns online.
We`ve got to make this government work again for everyone, because we got to make this country work again for everyone. And it starts by reducing the influence of money and increasing the influence of the voices of people all across this country.
That`s - that`s the kind of campaign that I believe and that`s - this is my chance to get out there and fight for it.
HAYES: That`s a - that`s a straightforward answer, admirably so. A second question I`ve been asking everyone and this is the final one and I`ll let you go. The filibuster, there has been - Jay Inslee who is the governor of Washington, he`s not a U.S. senator so there`s a different perspective on this, said today he would - he thinks they should get rid of the filibuster.
There`s some back and forth among different people. Would you support ending the filibuster in the near future?
WARREN: So I already have a record on this, back when the Republicans were blocking everything that we were trying to do, do you remember back in 2013 and 2014, man I was one of the ones out there fighting to beat back the filibuster.
And we did. We chopped the filibuster back a lot. You may remember they not only were blocking judges, they were blocking the head of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau so it couldn`t take on its power, blocking the NLRB so workers wouldn`t have a place to be able to go to have their complaints heard when - when their employers broke the law.
And I was all for it. My view on this is everything stays on the table. We can`t live in a world where the Republicans do what they want like they got rid of the filibuster for the Supreme Court, and then we turn around and as Democrats say oh, we`re going to play by some set of rules that are long passed now.
My view is it all stays on the table.
HAYES: All right Senator Elizabeth Warren in Massachusetts, thank you very much, I appreciate you making time tonight.
WARREN: Thank you.
HAYES: Ahead, the climate fight cutting through the heart of the Democratic Party debate, plus is Stacey Abrams about to run for president? I asked her last night that very question in front of a ruckus (ph) live audience and you will hear her fascinating answer next.
We did our second ever live "Why Is This Happening?" podcast taping last night at a sold out Gramercy Theatre here in New York City with Stacey Abrams. Abrams of course the former Democratic candidate for governor of Georgia who recently testified before House Democrats on voting rights and voter suppression.
And one of the first things we talked about was that moment when minority leader Chuck Schumer asked her to be the one to give the response to the state of the union address.
STACEY ABRAMS, (D) GEORGIA 2018 GUBERNATORIAL CANDIDATE: So, I actually saw Leader Schumer in New York. I`m sorry, in D.C. and we were meeting to talk about this other thing he has got thoughts of me doing but before we had that conversation.
(cheers and applause)
. but before we had that conversation he actually told everyone else to leave the room and I`m thinking how am I in trouble already? And he said, Speaker Pelosi and I were having this discussion. This is my year to pick the person. But she and I do this in tandem and we unanimously wanted you to be the person to do the State of the Union response. And I looked and the room, wait, I am alone, okay.
And I was flabbergasted. It was amazing he would ask me to do it when you guys did see the results of the election, right?
HAYES: We talked about a whole range of topics during our hour plus long conversation including her upbringing, the arc of her political career and what`s next for the Georgia democrat. And it was here I learned among other things Stacey Abrams is very, very funny.
HAYES: Are you considering running for Senate.
ABRAMS: I am considering it.
HAYES: Are you a possible presidential candidate?
HAYES: I mean, let me hone in. Is that something you`re actively thinking about?
ABRAMS: I will say this, I`ve been approached by groups and by individuals who have asked me to think about it and I am -- I don`t think you say no to anything. I think the best decision .
HAYES: Like president.
HAYES: .for instance.
ABRAMS: Look, if Idris Elba is like, would you like to go out with me, I`m not going to just say no because.
HAYES: You`d be like, I`m considering it Idris.
ABRAMS: Exactly. I am. I`m giving it careful thought, where are we going?
HAYES: That entire conversation which was a blast to do will be available wherever you get your podcast first thing tomorrow morning so subscribe now.
HAYES: Just got some breaking news in the Mueller probe. Paul Manafort has through his lawyers asked the D.C. District Court judge to give him a sentence significantly below the statutory minimum of ten years. Manafort wants to serve the time in his D.C. case at the same time as his sentence in the Virginia case, not surprising. His attorneys write quote, "importantly the defendant has not been charged with any crimes related to the primary focus of the special counsel`s investigation otherwise referred to as Russian collusion."
Meanwhile, there is an intensifying debate among democrats about how ambitious to be and how hard to push on addressing the current climate emergency. And while that is happening in the Democratic Party, the party that controls the White House and the Senate is an outlier among all major parties in the entire developed world in their ridiculous juvenile, embarrassing and idiotic continued denial of the obvious facts of the matter.
There is no party like the Republican Party in the world in this respect. They`re basically trying to turn the president`s tweets about how when it gets cold we could use more global warming, a joke he`s made at least 19 times in the last 6 years, into an official White House trolling panel. They`re putting together this body. They`ve even got a guy who compared persecution of carbon to persecution of the Jews in Nazi Germany.
WILLIAM HAPPER, CLIMATE CHANGE PANEL MEMBER: You know I get called a denier and anyone who objects to all of the hype gets called a denier. That`s supposed to make me a Holocaust denier. You know I`m getting tired of that and the comment I made was the demonization of carbon dioxide is just like the demonization of the poor Jews under Hitler. Carbon Dioxide is actually a benefit to the world and so were the Jews.
HAYES: OK. They also announced they are nominating this woman, the U.S. Ambassador to Canada, Kelly Knight Craft, as the next Ambassador to the United Nations which is a huge deal. That`s a cabinet-level post, OK? And this is what this individual said about literally the most pressing global challenge.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Do you yourself believe in climate change?
KELLY KNIGHT CRAFT, UNITED STATES AMBASSADOR TO CANADA: I believe there are signs both on both sides that are accurate.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You believe that there are scientists that -- science that proves there is -- man is not causing climate change?
CRAFT: Well, I think both sides have - you know they have their own results from their studies, and I appreciate and I respect both sides of the science.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Okay.
HAYES: Your possible next U.N. Ambassador, America. By the way, Kraft`s husband is a billionaire co-executive who "The New York Times" reports has a close relationship with former EPA Chief Scott Pruitt.
Meanwhile back on planet earth, literally, democrats are engaged in a spirited debate about how big to go. Is the climate crisis an existential threat that exists on another plane in which all old ways of doing things need to be thrown out and rethought or is it just another problem we face, a real one, that we have to use our current tools to evaluate and fix?
Joining me now, Heather McGhee, a distinguished Senior Fellow at Demos who made an emotional plea for urgent action yesterday on "Meet the Press," and Neera Tanden who is president at the Center for American Progress.
So I think this Green New Deal debate is interesting because first of all, let`s just say that it`s only happening in one part of American politics because there is a side doing things like nominating that U.N. Ambassador, who can`t - like there is nothing happening over there. Right? What do you see the debate - what are the axis of debates that are happening here, Heather?
HEATHER MCGHEE, ADVOCATE AND FORMER PRESIDENT OF DEMOS: So I think everything changed when the latest U.N. climate report came out. My son was a month old when that came out, and I sat there and just had all the range of feelings when you realize this person you brought into the world is going to be inheriting, if we do nothing over the next 12 years, basically a nightmare. So, you know, I think most of the Democratic Party, much of the main stream has been working for a very long time -- for 10 years for 20 years on a plan that frankly has just been surpassed. There is now a new goalpost, I wish that there weren`t but there is.
MCGHEE: And so the Green New Deal, the resolution, the idea, the vision that I will say is popular, immensely popular just in its raw form, the idea of using this crisis as an opportunity to rebuild the American dream and to channel that American ingenuity I grew up thinking was our hallmark as this country, that we were Superman and that when a meteor was going to be coming towards the planet, absolutely this country would suit up and get to fighting.
That idea of the Green New Deal is something that is aspirational but also absolutely the minimum that we need to do in order to stave off planetary disaster. That`s where we need to be and something popular with 80 percent of Americans including the majority of republicans.
HAYES: Where do we see this discussion, sort of the axes of tension in the discussion, Neera?
NEERA TANDEN, PRESIDENT OF THE CENTER FOR AMERICAN PROGRESS: So I think it`s - you know I agree with Heather, that I think the IPCC report fundamentally changed the calculus of this issue. But I really think if you think about how we`ve made substantial social change in the last 100 years, it`s both a mixture of widespread political movements that see a deep urgency.
And that is what is so important about the Green New Deal is that it`s recognizing the cataclysmic effects of climate change. But I also think you need to at some point have a specific plan just like the actual new deal had. And that`s the energy behind the Green New Deal.
It`s that we are recognizing the scale of the problem. I do think this debate is between -- has unfortunately become like a kind of effort of people talking past each other on what is the right solution, how do we actually get there. We have made progress there for a period -- like periods of time.
We were in the Paris deal; we did have the clean power plant. Those are being destroyed. It`s not that they`re neutral, it`s not like the republican administration signed Donald Trump is neutral on these topics--
HAYES: No, no, of course not.
TANDEN: It`s not like there`s nothing happening over there. There is an assault on climate scientists on the -- any effort in this country to deal with climate.
And I think a lot of democrats are caught between these two issues which is they`re defending against Trump, right, and trying to take on Trump. But also recognizing that it is a cataclysmic challenge and we can`t just have the solutions we`ve had in the past.
HAYES: So, to me there`s two things happening, right? Like one is about the sort of size of the scope of the Green New Deal division, right, which is like not just a price on carbon, right? It`s a bunch of stuff about transition in the economy, Medicare for all. That said, I want to put that aside.
But the other thing to me is just that a fight in the Democratic Party right now and in this primary that will get sorted about prioritization. That to me is one of the key things that`s happening. And I asked this -- I just asked Elizabeth Warren--
HAYES: -- and you heard her answer. I asked this of every candidate. It`s like what`s the first bill you move?
HAYES: What`s the big first domestic priority? And I think what we`re seeing right now is a fight in the party and partly that being worked out in real-time, Heather, that like climate`s the answer to that, should be the answer to that question.
MCGHEE: Well, I think the twin crises of our time are in equality and climate change. And the answer to both is more democracy. So, I actually agree with Senator Warren that it`s important to get the kind of climate bill that this planet desperately needs.
We needed to make the people who are in office at that time inoculated from the fossil fuel money that`s going to be--
MCGHEE: -- waiting for them on the other side. So, I see the theory of the case, but you can`t get the planet we deserve, that our children deserve without dealing with corruption.
HAYES: Do you see that, Neera, that priority question? Because I watched -- I have watched the 2008 primary and I watched healthcare I mean through the process of that primary healthcare -- it became clear that whoever was going to win that primary back in 2008--
HAYES: -- it was going to be a healthcare bill. Like that was going to -- like they had to deal with the stimulus because the economy fell apart. But like the first big thing. Do you think we`re watching this sort of prioritization battle kind of play out now?
TANDEN: Absolutely. I think that that is part of what it is. I hope that through this debate, we have not just a discussion of motive and who cares most about this, but what actually also happened in the 2008 campaign and I was on all sides of the debate was an actual discussion of how these plans would work.
So, as you remember there was detailed discussion back and forth between then Senator Obama and then Senator Clinton about how you actually got--
TANDEN: -- a universal healthcare plan and whether we`d have an individual mandate or not. And I -- and what I think is so vital about this debate is that we have a sense of urgency about it.
But it also believed that the next president has to have a specific plan. Not just a resolution, a resolution is really important, but a specific plan to deal with the climate crisis--
TANDEN: -- because if we`re just talking about what we like and what we care about and the priority and we don`t have specific goals or a specific legislation, then that too will let a lot of people--
TANDEN: -- off the hook.
HAYES: Politically (ph).
MCGHEE: So, I think this is a really important thing to respond to because there absolutely needs to be a next part of the Green New Deal movement, which is legislation.
MCGHEE: But I think that we can do that. And the first step to doing that is getting a sense of the Democratic Party on the senate floor that we are all behind this vision. There are things that are happening all across the country at the state level that`ll be components of the Green New Deal. And it`s not like we don`t have the answers. I mean, we have this weird can`t do right now--
MCGHEE: -- in this country. Even among democrats. We built the Hoover Dam; we put the man on the moon.
MCGHEE: Like why can`t we (inaudible)--
HAYES: Well, let me say as a final point to Neera`s point--
TANDEN: But let me just say, I agree with that.
TANDEN: We did put the man on the moon, and that`s what I appreciate about the Green New Deal.
TANDEN: But there was a plan to put a man on the moon. That`s my only point.
HAYES: Let me say that living through the 2008 primary about the mandate, Barack Obama was like, no, you can`t have the mandate and won the nomination. OK, we have the mandate. So, it`s like -- it mattered more what sort of consensus was in either the positions.
Heather McGhee and Neera Tanden, thank you both.
That is "ALL IN" for this evening.
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED. END