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

Tim Ryan wants to be answer for Democrats in Midwest. TRANSCRIPT: 4/16/19. All In w/ Chris Hayes.

Guests: Roula Allouch, Abdul El-Sayed, Masha Gessen, Tim Ryan, BarbaraBoxer, Robert Reich, Tim Ryan

CHRIS HAYES, MSNBC HOST:  Tonight on All In.


DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT:  She`s got a way about her that`s very, very bad I think for our country.

HAYES:  President attacks Congresswoman, Ilhan Omar.

TRUMP:  She is somebody that doesn`t really understand, I think, life -- real life.

HAYES: Drawing on the kind of bigotry that fueled his campaign.

TRUMP:  A total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States.

HAYES:  The kind of bigotry that fuels the republican base.

BERNIE KERIK, FORMER POLICE OFFICER:  She`s infatuated with Al-Qaeda, with Hamas.

HAYES:  Tonight, Trump`s words of incitement and his parties eagerness to pump it up.  Plus .

TRUMP:  It`s called flipping and it almost ought to be illegal.

HAYES:  Why current and former Trump aids are running scared of the Mueller Report.  And as the 2020 field continues to grow, Tim Ryan, joins me to explain why he`s running for president.

TIM RYAN, 2020 PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE:  We need a grinder.


HAYES:  But All In starts right now.   Good evening from New York.  I`m Chris Hayes.  Tonight a member of the United States House Representative is receiving death threats, due she says to the actions of the president of the United States.  And the president doesn`t care. 


UNIDENTIFIED MALE:  Congresswoman Omar since out a release last night saying that you`re tweet from a couple of days ago has lead to direct threats on her life.  Any second thoughts about that tweet and the way it was produced and put together?

TRUMP:  No, not at all.


HAYES:  Not at all.  We`re going to play the rest of Trump`s response in a moment.  Let`s take a moment to remember exactly what happened here.  The president of the United States posted a video that took a few words by Congresswoman Ilhan Omar completely out of context to suggest she was playing down the September 11 attacks.

That video that he posted (inaudible) her words with images of mass murder.  And as a result Omar said she experienced an increased in direct threats on my life.  Many directly referencing or replying to the president`s video.

In her statement Omar also noted the disturbing finding that counties that hosted a Trump rally in 2016 saw a 226 percent increase in hate crimes.  That is a real study by the way, she`s citing. 

One that says something truly unnerving about how this president`s rhetoric is received by some of his more armed (ph) supporters.  Not to the rest of the president`s answer.


TRUMP:  Look, she`s been very disrespectful to this country.  She`s been very disrespectful frankly to Israel.  She is somebody that doesn`t really understand, I think, life.  Real life.  What it`s all about.  It`s unfortunate.  She`s got a way about her that`s very, very bad, I think, for our country.   I think she`s extremely unpatriotic and extremely disrespectful to our country.


HAYES:  OK.  There`s a lot there.  Let`s start with the president`s claim that Ilhan Omar doesn`t understand what quote "real life is."  Whatever you think of Ilhan Omar or her politics or things she said, there is one thing about her that is indisputable.  She sure as hell knows what real life is about.

When she was eight years old, Omar fled Civil War in Somalia.  She then lived in a refugee camp in Kenya for four years before making it to America as a high school freshman.  And despite all that adversary, she eventually rose to become a member of Congress.

Ilhan Omar was not, for the record, born to rich parents.  She did not attend a private boarding school and get handed hundreds of millions of dollars by her daddy via dubious tax schemes and outright fraud unlike the man who lectures her about real life.

  But it`s no surprise that Donald Trump has such contempt for Ilhan Omar.  Trump launched his political career by harnessing anti-Muslim bigotry with the lie that Barrack Obama was a secret Muslim born outside the country.

He went on to falsely claim he saw thousands of Muslims in New Jersey cheering the September 11 attacks and made a wholesale rejection of one billion Muslims worldwide the center piece of his campaign.


TRUMP:  Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our countries representatives can figure out what the hell is going on.


HAYES:  You hear the crowd there?  That enthusiastic applause is a good reminder that Trump is exploiting anti-Muslim sentiment that has long existed in his party.  And Jamelle Bouie pointed out today, a 2004 poll that found that about 40 percent of self-identified republicans said that Muslim Americans should be required to register with the government.

A 2006 poll found wide anti-Muslim prejudice where republicans ascribing more negative political and religious qualities to Muslims and being more opposed to having Muslim neighbors than our democrats and independents.

Long before Trump`s presidency you could see not so thinly veiled anti- Muslim bigotry and GOP fear mongering about Sharia law and the so called ground zero Masque.  Today you see it manifested in the conspiracy theories about the fire at Notre Dame, which some of the right are now suggesting falsely was the result of an Islamic terrorist attack.

And Trump T.V. last night disgraced an ex-police commissioner convicted felon, Bernie Kerik, flaunted his own bigotry claiming that Congresswoman Omar is infatuated with Al-Qaeda and that Council on American-Islamic Relations the Muslim Civil Rights group is in fact a terrorist organization.


KERIK:  She`s infatuated with Al-Qaeda, with Hamas, Hezbollah.  She was at CAIR at a fundraiser.  She was the keynote speaker at a fundraiser for CAIR, which according to the United Arab Emirates in our nation, they are a terrorist organization.


HAYES:  Joining me for a reaction, the chair of the national board of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, Roula Allouch.  First I guess I should have you respond to Kerik.  Though obviously it`s a fairly slanderous statement.

ROULA ALLOUCH, CHAIR, CAIR:  Yes, thanks Chris for having me and for the opportunity to speak on these issues.  So the statement that was just referenced, you know CAIR is an organization that works for the civil rights and liberties of American Muslims and by the United States government`s own definition and clarification is not a terrorist organization.

So as Americans we should look to what our own government says about our organization and CAIR is very happy and honored to work with government officials.  We often times have elected officials at our events in support of our community and the work that we do in support of American Muslims.

HAYES:  There has been -- we have seen a real pernicious anti-Muslim bigotry in American politics in the last 18 years and even before then but it intensified after 9/11, I think it`s fair to say.  Where do things stand now as you watch the president doing what he`s doing and the Republican Party and the conservative movement on Trump T.V. in the way they speak about one of two Muslim women elected to Congress?

ALLOUCH:  I mean what we`re seeing, Chris, is such an increase in hate -- hateful attacks against Muslims and very specifically Representative Tlaib and Omar.  Representative Omar is a courageous leader.  She`s someone who`s speaking her truth.

As you referenced, she`s somebody who knows a lot about life.  She survived war, she chose a new land, and she`s committed to serving as an American and serving the American people as a representative in Congress.

And we have unfortunately people on both sides of the aisle now who aren`t speaking out strongly enough for her and in support of her as the president is inciting these hateful attacks on her.

HAYES:  You know that word inciting which you use and others have used and I`ve used myself, the argument that I`ve seen from some -- some of the president`s defenders is look, politics ain`t beanbag, criticism is criticism, she said what she said, we (inaudible) it with images of what happened on that day.  Fair is fair.  What do you say to that?

ALLOUCH:  Well, first her words were taken out of context.  And secondly and probably even more importantly she has reported that she`s seeing an increase in death threats and attacks against her and to the point where she`s not receiving attacks daily.

This is a person who`s serving our country, who`s serving as a representative in Congress and deserves people on both sides of the aisle to say enough is enough.  People need to let her speak her truth and speak for herself but she shouldn`t be subjected to these increasing attacks and -- and -- that are unfortunately leading to threats against her life.

HAYES:  Is -- is there -- how would you say things are more broadly.  I mean obviously Ilhan Omar has become a kind of lightening rod for certain aspects of our political system and it`s bigotries but more broadly what do you think that this president has done in shaping the way that conversations happen about Islam-Muslim America?

ALLOUCH:  You know Chris it`s been a really difficult time for the American Muslim community since the campaign of 2016 as you referenced many years before that.  But certainly since the presidential campaign and since this president`s time in office with the Muslim ban and many other attacks on civil rights and liberties of Muslims in many other communities.

It`s been a challenging time and Representative Omar and Representative Tlaib being the first two Muslim women in Congress are a very great example of good that come from difficult times and they serve as inspirations to American Muslims and people of all faith in our country.

And so we`re honored that we have their expertise and their leadership at time where there`s so much difficulty.

HAYES:  All right.  Roula Allouch of CAIR, thank you for your time tonight.

ALLOUCH: Thank you Chris.

HAYES:  Joining me now, Abdul El-Sayed is former Michigan gubernatorial candidate, chair of the progressive group Southpaw Michigan and Masha Gessen, staff writer New Yorker who wrote -- who`s new piece discusses the dangerous bullying of Ilhan Omar.  Masha, why don`t you talk about what you wrote in that piece, what do you mean by the dangerous bulling of Ilhan Omar.

MASHA GESSEN, THE NEW YORKER STAFF WRITER:  Well, I was writing about what I know about political violence in regimes run by autocrats or aspiring autocrats and you know violence in such -- by such leaders is often delegated and they go after the weak.

The go after people who`s presumptive allies don`t stand by them.  And I think that`s we`re observing.  We`re observing Donald Trump basically painting a target on Ilhan Omar`s back by -- and we`re observing congressional democrats pointedly not standing by her.

And exposing her to extreme danger.  In a sense, you know, we don`t expect anything else from Trump.  But I think we should be expecting more from people who should be Omar`s allies.

HAYES:  Abdul, as someone who`s been in the arena yourself and run for office and knows how brutal political rhetoric can be particularly in polarized times, I want to ask you the question I just asked Roula, which is basically what is -- where are the boundaries and what -- what makes this and what the president tweeted and the way they`re treating Ilhan Omar different than the normal parry and thrust of politics to your mind.

ABDUL EL-SAYED, FORMER MICHIGAN GUBERNATORIAL CANDIDATE:  I think the question we have to be asking is about how open a democracy we want.  Do we want anybody and everybody who believes in this country to be able to stand up and run.  And to run on the beliefs that they espouse.

And the fact of the matter is -- is that what the president is doing is using Ilhan Omar`s faith and her race as a subtext to make an argument about certain kinds of people not belonging.  And I want to go back to Masha`s point for a second.

Because the fact of the matter is we know that Donald Trump is the bully in chief.  That`s -- that`s not a matter of question.  The matter of question is whether or not democrats decide that diversity is a matter of window dressing that we like you if you`re not saying anything of if democrats are serious about standing up for members of our party who believe in -- in potentially different ideals -- and ideals.

And are willing to speak truth to power on -- on challenging conversations.  And we`re not seeing that out of the Democratic Party.  I ran for office in 2018.  I was not under the same kind of spotlight but I had to take on a full time body guard because of the number of death threats I was getting running for a state office.

I cannot imagine the kinds of challenges that Ilhan and her family and the folks around her on her staff have to deal with everyday fearing for their lives because of the incitement of this bully and the failure to stand up on behalf of the Democratic Party leadership.

HAYES:  You know Masha, one thing that I think is -- is sort of bizarrely memory hold here is that one of the president`s more fanatical supporters, you know, sent pipe bombs to two dozen of his most prominent political foes just a few weeks before the election.

He (inaudible) but it was clear that he was picking out people based on who the president was going after and the -- the actions of one man, the president isn`t responsible for that person, but it`s just a fact to the matter that looms over all of this discussion.

GESSEN:  Exactly.  And that again, political violence in modern times is often delegated.  It`s designated somebody as a target and showing, you know, this person is not protected.  This person nobody is standing up to defend this person.

And what we saw, again, over the weekend is that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said that she spoke to the sergeant in arms about protecting Omar but she has not said -- she has not acknowledged Omar in anyway.  She has not stood up for Omar herself.

She`s asked someone else to protect this person.  And that -- that is the kind of protection that is not a defense.

HAYES:  Masha made the point, Abdul, about the -- the ways in which Omar`s own rhetoric is -- is (inaudible) for some democrats just because on the substantive level some of the things she said to talk about Israel they don`t agree with or other things they don`t agree with substantively, what do you say to people who say look, I have to keep my distance from her politically or I don`t believe in her substantively and you want me to go out there and vouch for her. 

EL-SAYED:  Well this party has always prided itself on being a party (ph) of a big tent and being willing to stand up for the little guy and speak truth the power.  And you`ve got a leader in Congresswoman Omar who is standing up, speaking her truth, talking about issues that everybody has run away from for a very long time. 

And what we`re seeing is that the party is not standing with her.  They`re pushing her outside of the tent.  That`s just not OK.  You mention Cesar Sayoc and I`ll tell you -- now I`ve got a 16 month old baby girl and I remember getting a call about the fact that we had an FBI agent come to our house and that we were on Cesar`s watch list.

He had googled our -- our name and -- and our address.  And the fact of the matter is you shouldn`t have to worry about your kids being target for violence to run for office in this country or to serve your country.

And one more point about Congresswoman Omar.  This is a woman who`s taken an oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the country not once when she took office, but twice when she choice to become an American.

And that`s -- that`s a choice that she -- she knows well because she was escaping the kind of challenges that she left in Somalia.  This woman believes in this country and we`ve got to believe in her and her leadership and we`ve got to stand with our leaders even if we might disagree with them politically.  And the Democratic Party`s got a lot of learning to do here.

HAYES:  Masha, you know, one of the -- the things we`ve watched develop over time is the way in which the GOP and the president have used Muslims as a kind of scapegoat, as a kind of other, and the politics of that; as someone who has written and thought about the way those politics work, what do you see happening here?

GESSEN:  Well I see Omar basically not behaving in the way that she`s expected.  She is not performing humility - -

HAYES:  Right.

GESSEN:  - - in the way that a freshman Congresswoman should.  She`s not performing gratitude in the way that an immigrant should.  And make no mistake, what Trump is saying about her being unpatriotic about being a bad person, he`s talking about a bad immigrant, a bad brown immigrant, a bad Muslim immigrant who - - who`s - - who was allowed into this country and is not being grateful enough.  I think those - - that - - those are the implications and I`m putting it very mildly what he said.

HAYES:  Right.

GESSEN:  And - - and - - I also want to say that -  -that I don`t actually think the - - the problem is disagreement among Democrats - - between Democrats and - - and Omar on substantive issues.  I think that there`s actually style disagreements.

HAYES:  Yes.  Yes.

GESSEN:  Right?  Substantive issues that she`s bringing - - bringing up that Muslims, the - - the civil rights of Muslim Americans are trampled including by the government.  That`s indisputable.  Things that she has said about Israel and about Israeli influence on American politics are indisputable.  The way she has said them has been ill advised at times.  And her message is basically, you know what, this is - - this is how I`m going to say it.  That may not be the most politic way of doing it but its certainly should not be punishable by the kind of threats that she has received.

HAYES:  Alright. Abdul El-Sayed and Masha Gessen, thank you both for being with me tonight.

EL-SAYED:  Thank you.

GESSEN (ph):  Thank you.

HAYES:  Next, why the impending release of the Mueller report has some White House officials in a panic because it might reveal who talked to the Special Council.  Fearing the president`s wrath in two minutes. 


HAYES:  Ahead of the release of a redacted version of the Mueller report on Thursday, current and former White House officials are in a state of panic according to exclusive reporting from NBC News.  Aides are concerned about being exposed as Mueller`s sources for damaging information on the president.  Experiencing what one source called quote "break down level anxiety".  Some 20 White House aides sat for voluntary interviews with the Special Council after being encouraged to cooperate by the president`s former legal team.

But now the possibility looming of new evidence incriminating the president, staffers are worried about the consequences of sharing what they knew.  Because we know how this president feels about so called rats, as one former official told NBC News, they got asked questions and told the truth.  Now they`re worried the wrath will follow.  I`m joined now by one of the reporters who broke that story NBC News Reporter Carol Lee.  What is the big concern here among the people in this circle?

CAROL LEE, NBC NEWS REPORTER:  The big concern is that these are officials who were told to cooperate with the Mueller investigation by the White House and president`s legal team.  They went and did that.  They had, in their view, had no choice but to be completely honest.  Tell them everything they knew and now they`re freaking out because this report is going to come out and the president may or may not be able to determine who told the Special Council what and things that are going to make him look really bad.

And so they`re worried are there names going to be in this report.  Is it going to be, you know, so and so said the president did X or is it going to be kind of a Bob Woodward style, like who done it in terms of - -

HAYES:  Right.

LEE: - - who`s individual one - -

HAYES:  - - the things that are said in the room.

LEE:  Yes, and everyone can kind of figure it out.  And so, they`re really worried about it because the president is a - - he is vindictive in this way.

HAYES:  He`s wrathful.

LEE:  Wrathful.  Yes.  Good word.  And so, you - - you know what is he going to do?  Is he going to go after them on Twitter?  Is he going to, you know, trying to block them from getting different gigs?  It - - who knows.  It could run the gambit.  I mean his allies will do the same.

HAYES:  I thought that was interesting because these are not people by in large who still work in the White House.  This was my understanding.

LEE:  No.  There`s a few that still work in the White House.

HAYES:  Right.  But it`s a big circle of people and I thought it was interesting that they`re fearful of the president`s wrath.  Because question of like, what would the president do to you?  And the answer is, the president runs the Republican party at this point.  Right? 

LEE:  Right.

HAYES:  Like, if the president`s mad at you, you`re in trouble if you work in Republican politics.

LEE:  Absolutely and he can do a lot of damage to - - and its unpleasant (inaudible).  We`ve talked to some (inaudible), look it`s unpleasant.  You know, he`s coming after you and he`s tearing down your reputation and it matters.  It matters if and, you know, in terms of the work you`re trying to do.  It just matters and I don`t know how you feel about yourself.  And so there`s - -

HAYES:  If you let it - -

LEE:  If you - -

HAYES:  Let me play therapist for a second.  If you let it, anonymous (inaudible) out there.  There`s - - there`s something strange that`s happening.  So we`re two days away from this report.  Right?  So the president`s people all run around and say, we`re vindicated.  No collusion.  No obstruction.  Everything`s fine and yet they`re like preparing this counter report.

LEE:  Yes.

HAYES:  A lot of people raise the question like, if a jury came back and said you`re not guilty you wouldn`t prepare a counter report to refute said jury.

LEE:  Well it just shows that the jury hasn`t come out - - they don`t know.

HAYES:  Right.

LEE:  I mean, that`s the, you know, so they`re putting on this face of - - of positive spin.  The president -  -the president was clear.  He didn`t do anything wrong.  The Barr Summary really gave him a lot of momentum and the reality is that met - - the reality that they know is they don`t know what`s in this report and they don`t know what it`s going to sound like and look like and how it`s going to change the political landscape to the extent that it does.  What its going to do to Republicans on Capitol Hill, it call depends on what`s in there and they don`t know.  And so, they`re preparing for all different scenarios and will calibrate depending on what the actual report says.

HAYES:  One of the - - one of the things that there`s been a lot of focus on is the obstruction part of this and Don McGahn and obstruction.  Do - - have they - - do you - - do we know what they`ve been briefed on?  They`re reporting they`ve been briefed inside that White House but do we know who`s been briefed and what they`ve been briefed on? 

LEE:  We don`t know exactly and we don`t know and - - and I would say that there`s a lot they don`t know.

HAYES:  Right.

LEE:  And so - -

HAYES:  So they`re walking around, the White House staff right now is walking around and it`s a black box to them largely, other than Barr`s letter.

LEE:  Exactly.  And that is very unsettling to them and - - and they`re about - - they`re in this timeframe where they were riding on the high of Barr`s Summary which gave them a lot of momentum, a lot of political capital and they were able to spend that very positively to the president and that`s about to potentially run out.  And so that`s why you`re seeing a kind of freak out from people who cooperated because what`s going to come to them and then the president`s legal team is kind of preparing for all different types of scenarios.

HAYES:  I always think it`s a fascinating - - it`s a fascinating, sort of, character study in that the people around the president have no idea what he`s done or what he`ll say.  Right?  Like, at any point everyone`s operating blind because, like, lord knows what Donald Trump has done.  They don`t know.

LEE:  It what makes him such a difficult client if you`re a member of his legal team and also to work for him.  Yes.

HAYES:  Yes.  Among other things.  Carol Lee.  It`s great to have you.  Thank you.

LEE:  Thanks.

HAYES:  Ahead with the Democratic field growing and growing, Ohio Congressman Tim Ryan joins me to talk about why he`s running for president.  That`s next.


HAYES:  Part of what`s feeding the increase media attention to presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg, Mayor of South Bend, Indiana is the idea that Democrats need to win back the greater industrial Midwest to be successful in a presidential race.  And that a candidate from that part of the country, broadly, has the best shot at doing so.  It`s part of Minnesota Senator Amy Klobuchar`s pitching her comparative advantage as the presidential candidate.  It`s part of the reason why Ohio Senator Sherrod Brown seriously flirted with a run for president before deciding not to. 

There`s another Ohio politician who is giving 2020 candidacy a real shock.  If elected, Congressman Tim Ryan will become the first sitting member of the House of Representatives elected to president since another Ohio politician James Garfield did it way back in 1880.  With me now is Congressman Tim Ryan, 2020 Democratic presidential candidate.  Good to have you here.


HAYES:  Of all the people in the United States age 35 or above or natural born citizens, why should you Tim Ryan be president of the United States?

RYAN:  Well first and foremost I can win.  I can rebuild that blue wall.  The Western PA, Ohio, you must mentioned Michigan, Wisconsin but more than that I think I understand the native economic that - - the economic needs of people and communities like the one I represent.  And that, to me is the essential issue in our country today.  The economic inequality, the economic divide that we have and the fact that people are just sick of trying to get by.  They want to thrive not just survive and that`s what I`m going to bring to the White House.

HAYES:  When you say you understand, sort of, the - - the - - the - - you can win.  Right?  You can rebuild the blue wall.  Could you win statewide in Ohio?

RYAN:  Yes.

HAYES:  Tim Ryan - -

RYAN:  Yes.

HAYES:  And why not do that?

RYAN:  Ohio goes right back on the map.

HAYES:  No, I`m saying why not run for statewide office?  Why go from running for House of - - of - - Representatives - -

RYAN:  Yes.

HAYES:  You know what I mean? 

RYAN:  Yes.  Totally.  Well I`ve been in Congress, it is my 17th year.  I`ve been working on these Federal issues.  They`re very important to me.  I think the - - the issues around our foreign policy, our engagement in the world critically important.  Trade deals have been a train wreck for communities like mine and hollowed us out.  So I don`t - - I think if you don`t get those macro economic policies straight around trade, around taxes, around really Federal investments around the new technologies, we`ve been trying to piece it together in communities like Youngstown and a bunch of others around the United States.  But if you don`t have the force of the Federal government behind initiatives to win the future, each community in each state`s going to struggle.

HAYES:  When you think about where the country`s headed under Donald Trump, what do you think the worst thing that is - - that he has done as president in this?

RYAN:  I think we`re - - we`re obviously the example he sets.  That will go when he goes.  That example will have - - we`ll have hit the reset button.  The economic failures.  His failure to really address the structural changes of our economy are going to last for a long time because China is breathing down out throats.  So he divided the country further than we were already divided.  A divided country is a weak country and it - - it`s preventing us from really dealing with this - - these economic challenges.  China`s coming after us.  They have 40 percent of the electric vehicle market.  They have 60 percent of the solar panel market.  They`re building bases in Africa, Islands in the South China Sea.  They`re building a railroad from Northeast China to Rotterdam.

HAYES:  But isn`t that just a zero sum version of a - - of a world view the president himself also shares?  Right?  I mean, if you look at the president on trade, things like NAFTA or China.  Right?  His view is, it`s very kind of mercantilist zero sum view.  If Canada and Mexico are doing well, we`re getting screwed?  If China`s doing well, we`re getting screwed?  What I`m hearing from you is, it is sort of a zero sum between us and China but it cannot be the - - the - - the case that people prosper together.  That different countries prosper together?

RYAN:  Totally.  If the United States really has an industrial policy.  If the United States is saying, if the president of the United States is sitting down saying, how do we dominate the electric vehicle market?  China has 40 percent now.  How do we win that?  How do we make those cars in the United States?  The batteries, the charging stations, how do we make solar panels in the United States?  Let`s compete.  Let`s go.  I`m ready to have a competition with China.  The problem now is, China has a 10 year plan, 20 year plan, 50 year plan, 100 year plan.  We live in a 24 hour news cycle and we`re getting our clocks cleaned.

HAYES:  Well, but they`re also - - they`re also not a democracy.  They`re - - the - - the - - the Chinese communist party knows a thing or two about planning.

RYAN:  Look - -

HAYES:  It`s a tough thing to replicate.

RYAN:  Yes.  OK.  Did they - - they do have adherent advantages but they don`t have the creativity, the ingenuity, the innovation, the kind of where with all we do to create a new economy.  We have the creative edge over China.  Problem is, we`re not tapping into it because we`re not investing in education.  We`re not investing in research.  We don`t have a plan around some of these newer technologies.  These technologies are growing at 25-30 percent a year.  You take (inaudible) manufacturing, 3D printing, 3 to 5 million jobs in the next 10 years.  Let`s dominate it.  So, you don`t get to pick your opponent. 

HAYES:  Right.

RYAN:  So our opponent is China and they have their advantages.  We have ours.  Problem is, we`re not tapping into ours.

HAYES:  What would be, if you were elected president of the United States and lets say through somewhat an amazing political turn of events, you had both the House and the Senate that were Democratic majorities.  What would be your first piece of legislation you would move?  Your first domestic policy priority?

RYAN:  Create an industrial policy in the United States.  Really focus on how we dominate these industries.

HAYES:  What does that look like legislatively?  Like you mean, like, a - - a sort of infrastructure bill?  A sort of research and funding bill? 

RYAN:  I think - - think it`s got to be all of them.  Of course you`ve got to do infrastructure, roads, bridges, kind of traditional stuff.  We`ve got to make sure we have the high speed internet that China, once again, killing us on 5G.  We`re stuck in 4G.  This is all part of an industrial policy.  Pick two or three of these industries that we say we want to dominate.  Sit down with the car companies.  Sit down with the Department of Energy, Department of Defense, National Science Foundation, small business.  How do you get early stage capital into some of these innovations?

HAYES:  You`re talking real industrial policy. 

RYAN:  I`m tired.  Look man. 

HAYES:  Like, we`re going to plan on these - - we`re going to -  -we`re going to strategically put our chips behind these enterprises, in these areas?

RYAN:  Yes.

HAYES:  That mean, how do you - - how do you - - how do you - - I`m not saying its wrong. 

RYAN:  I mean, how do you go to the moon?  Right?  You`re like OK and then all of these technologies spin out of that.  Who knows what - - what batteries are going to come and I`m not saying it should be a centralized plan, I`m saying bring in our free enterprise system. That`s our comparative advantage to help us scale this up and it should all - - a lot of it should be focused around decarburizing the United States and making sure we are leading the world in reversing climate change using our government.  Using our education, workforce and free enterprise system. 

HAYES:  Is that something that the voters in your Congressional district can get behind, decarburizing the United States?

RYAN:  It`s jobs.  The jobs that come from it.

HAYES:  The jobs they can get from it.

RYAN:  Yes.  We - - we talk about climate.  We need to be talking about jobs. 

HAYES:  This- - isn`t that the conceit of the Green New Deal is to do that.  Right?

RYAN:  Well, yes, maybe.  Yes.  I mean, to guarantee jobs in that other piece - -

HAYES:  Right.

RYAN:  - - but I`m saying winds are growing 20-25 percent a year.  Solar is growing at 25-30 percent a year.  Addid (ph) is adding 3 to 5 million new jobs in the next 10 years.  We`re going to make - - we`re going to go from making one to two million electric vehicles in the United States to 30 million somewhere in the world, someone`s going to make those. 

HAYES:  Right.

RYAN:  I want those made in the United States and here`s the key too Chris.  We have to do this.  The tax code, the incentives, the investments, we have to drive them to distressed communities, to communities of color, old coal, old steel, old auto, old rubber communities that have been left behind in the deep south.  We`ve got to spread the wealth here.  80 percent of Venture Capital it goes to three states, California, New York, Massachusetts.  9 percent goes to women, less than 2 percent go to people of color.  We`ve got to spread this out.  Everybody wants a piece of the action and we`re going to cut these workers in on the deal.

HAYES:  Spread the wealth.  An intentional or unintentional Huey Long reference.  Congressman Tim Ryan, Democratic presidential candidate.  Thank you for making time.

RYAN:  Thanks for having me. 

CHRIS HAYES:  Ahead, as of right now, Senator Bernie Sanders is the current front runner for the Democratic nomination.  Why that is reportedly worrying some Democrats coming up.  Which Trump official can get from confirmation to investigation the quickest.  That`s (inaudible) too.  Next.


HAYES:  Thing one tonight, how much does Donald Trump hate the swamp?  The answer is not much at all.  You see, "Drain the Swamp" was just a thing he said at his - - that his campaign crowds liked but as soon as he got to Washington, he was almost cartoonish how feeted the Trump swamp got.  His cabinet was filled with people like Ryan Zinke, Secretary of the Interior was in the job for less than two years and managed to rack up 15 investigations into his conduct.  He resigned in disgrace and should be far from the swamp says according the rules laid out in that pretend "Drain the Swamp" executive order by the president. 

Executive branch appointees are banned from lobbying for five years after leaving their government jobs.  So whatever Zinke`s doing, I`m absolutely sure his new work is very separate from anything he did at the Department of Interior or maybe it`s with a gold mining firm that`s pursing project approvals involving the Department of Interior.  That`s right.  Zinke is joining the board of U.S. Gold Corporation who`s CEO cited Zinke`s excellent relationship with the Interior Department in explaining his hiring. 

Zinke, of course, says the job would not constitute lobbying.  Of course not.  Well the good news is that the Interior Department has a brand new secretary now.  So all those ethic investigations are in the rearview mirror or not and that`s thing two in 60 seconds.  So you`d think that after he finally drained the swamp of someone as conflicted as Ryan Zinke, President Trump would choose a squeaky clean replacement to head the Department of Interior.  If you were watching the confirmation hearing for his nominee, the first time that something was awry were the actual swamp things in the audience.  Those were of course Green Peace activists protesting Bernhardt who they call the ultimate swamp thing due to his work as a corporate lobbyist for the oil industry and allegations that he kept lobbying after legally declaring he had stopped.

And that he used his position to push for a pause (ph) he desired by a former lobbying client.  Oh, and that he blocked the release of a report showing the effects of pesticides on endangered species.  Bernhardt has so many conflicts of interest he and I`m quoting here "has to carry a small card listing them all" according to the Washington Post.  No, seriously.  He keeps a card in his pocket in case he needs a cheat sheet about all his conflicts but none of that stopped every single Republican Senator and a few Democrats from voting to confirm Bernhardt last week as our new Secretary of Interior.

That was last Thursday.  And then yesterday, just two four days later, the Interior Departments internal watchdog opened an investigation into the brand new Secretary David Bernhardt.  Come on down.  Welcome.  That follows requests from eight Senators from four government ethics watchdog groups. 

PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP:  We need to finish exactly what we came here to do.  Drain the Swamp.


HAYES:  Last Monday, ICE agents pulled over Jose Gonzalez Carranza at 5:30 in the morning, less than a block from his home, as he was on his way to his welding job.  He said half a dozen ICE agents approached the car in military style gear with weapons drawn, yelling hands up and led him away to be processed for deportation, and left behind a 12-year-old daughter who is an American citizen and who lives with her grandparents. 

Her mom wasn`t able to be there because she was killed in Afghanistan as a member of the U.S. Army when she was 22.  Army Private First Class Barbara Vieyra was mortally wounded when insurgents attacked her unit using an improvised explosive device and a rocket-propelled grenade fire in Kunar Province, Afghanistan, the Pentagon said at the time. 

In other words, the Trump administration decided to send armed ICE agents to arrest and deport the widower of a U.S. service member killed in the line of duty.  A man who is father to a U.S. citizen and who, according to his lawyer, has committed no crime other than being out of status. 

Gonzalez Carranza was even granted a legal reprieve by an immigration judge after his wife was killed, and an immigration judge ended deportation proceedings against him.  But get this, ICE, for reasons that are unclear, re-filed the case against him in 2017, and the judge ordered him deported in December after he missed his court hearing. 

Gonzalez Carranza`s lawyer says he never knew about the hearing because ICE sent the notice to the wrong address. 

After three days in custody, he shipped off to Mexico.  And he would still be there in Mexico away from his daughter were not for reporters from the "Arizona Republic" who picked up the story, published his account, and managed to do the nearly impossible, which is to shame the Trump administration over the cruelty of their immigration policy.  Gonzalez Carranza was allowed to re-enter the U.S. at the Nogales port of entry and he made his way back to his home. 

His lawyer says Gonzalez Carranza never should have been deported in the first place because the day he was arrested, his lawyer filed a motion to reopen the case, which triggers an automatic state of removal. 

Now, the story here is a reminder about the things to focus with respect to this administration`s immigration policy. 

Number one, as Adam Serwer of "The Atlantic" wrote, the cruelty is the point.  The contempt they have for immigrants and families and loved ones is both genuine and also routinely performed in order to create an atmosphere that they hope will drive people away and keep people out and make their most bigoted and wrathful supporters feel big and tough. 

Number two, even as shameless as they are, they are bound by political gravity.  We saw this when massive uproar and protest forced them against their will to suspend the monstrous child separation policy.  We see it here -- when outcry over the deportation of the widower of a fallen soldier forced them to back track.  Which means as shameless and insulated as they may be from outrage as much as they may enjoy triggering the libs, the outrage still does work. 


HAYES:  This item in "The New York Times" today is a perfect microcosm of the dynamic surrounding Bernie Sanders in these Democratic primaries.  Big headline about panic among certain anti-Sanders forces in the Democratic coalition, that is early strong polling and nearly boundless fundraising ability is going to make him hard to stop. 

The article even includes a quote from operative David Brock agonizing over the fact going after Sanders only gives him ammunition for more fund- raising to his enormous list of supporters.  "You can see him reading the headlines now," Mr. Brock mused.  "Rich people don`t like me." 

And then, sure enough, an hour later, this email from Sanders` campaign to his supporter saying, "The Democratic establishment and high-dollar donors are already planning how to stop our campaign.  They`re terrified of our movement as they should be."

Sanders who`s not a member of the Democratic Party has often clashed with the party in his long political career, has both the most strained relationship with the institutional Democratic Party and is also as of this moment unless and until things change the front-runner for the same party`s nomination. 

Joining me now are two veterans of the Democratic Party.  Barbara Boxer, former U.S. senator from California, and now host of "The Boxer" podcast, and Robert Reich, former secretary of labor in the Clinton administration, now the chancellor and professor of public policy at U.C. Berkeley. 

Senator Boxer, let me start with you.  There`s never been a dynamic like this in the party.  There`s been insurgent and such, but the relationship between the sort of institutional party and Bernie Sanders strikes me as distinct.  What do you think? 

BARBARA BOXER (D), FORMER CALIFORNIA SENATOR:  If you go back a ways, you`ll find that it has happened before.  Having said that, it should never happen again.  And, you know, I learned through a lot of hard knocks in all the years I was in office, 40 years in office, avoid self-inflicted wounds.  If you don`t like Bernie, pick a candidate and go. 

HAYES:  Right. 

BOXER:  And, you know -- and also, this attack on the so-called establishment, I don`t get that, either.  Who`s the establishment?  Nancy Pelosi?  She`s as progressive as they come.  The head of the DNC, Tom Perez?  He`s as progressive.  And the leadership in Congress. 

So, all of this is ridiculous.  It`s a self-inflicted wound if it continues.  People should knock it off and let this campaign go forward.  May the best person win this race. 

HAYES:  You know, one of the interesting bets being made here by Sanders, it strikes me, Robert, is about how Democratic primary voters, and how the grassroots feels about the institutional Democratic Party.  I think he`s making a bet that they`re frustrated or feeling alienated from them which is a bet that Donald Trump made that paid off very well for him, obviously, back in 2016. 

But I`m not sure the relationship between rank and file Democratic primary voters is the same.  What do you think? 

ROBERT REICH, FORMER SECRETARY OF LABOR:  Well, here`s the thing -- first of all, I agree completely with Senator Boxer.  The last thing the Democratic Party needs or progressives need is what Barack Obama called a circular firing squad.  I mean, we`ve got to stay together in order to get Donald Trump out of office.  That`s the most important thing.

Now, in terms of grassroots versus establishment, grassroots in terms of -- or big money, there is an issue.  It transcends the Democratic Party, it transcends progressivism, it really is throughout the United States, we see more and more concentration of wealth and power at the top.

Now, this doesn`t mean there has to be a fight inside the Democratic Party but we do have to understand that one of the big problems facing this country right now, politically and socially and economically, is we`ve got a different kind of economy, where political power and great wealth at the top are connected.  We got to fight that. 

HAYES:  Let me reply to -- I want to get your response from both of you on this about avoiding a circular firing squad.  I hear this from Democrats all the time.  They`re anxious about sort of that, they`re anxious about the primary for that reason. 

And one of the things I think of is the Republican primary in 2016 was the ugliest thing I`ve ever seen.  I mean, they were talking about the president`s endowment during a debate.  That was a debate point with Marco Rubio.  OK? 

And, yet, look what happened.  Like, they won the election as dirty and nasty as it got.  I guess I wonder, like, Senator Boxer, what do you take away as the lesson here about what makes for a good or bad primary in choosing -- in choosing a nominee?  

BOXER:  Listen, we`ve got some incredible people running, and all of this is a big distraction.  And comparing it to what happened with Trump, I don`t even want to go there.  It was the ugliest thing I ever saw. 

HAYES:  Right, but it worked. 

BOXER:  Well, it worked -- it didn`t work for the country.  Let`s be clear. 

And frankly, I don`t think it worked for the Republican Party.  I think that party is dying.  But that`s a whole other topic. 

I think right now, we`ve got to move forward with this, let each candidate put his or her, you know, issues out there.  As I look at the field, I find it interesting.  I think Bernie`s doing very well.  And I think that means it`s OK for Joe Biden now to run because the age is no longer a factor. 

You`re going to have happy warriors.  You`re going to have angry warriors.  You`re going to have people who are single issue.  It`s going to be fabulous, but we don`t need these letters back and forth from -- to the so- called establishment which, again, I don`t know what that means. 

And to Bob`s point, he`s right about too much money in politics.  Those are the rules and some candidates decided to walk away from the big money, and some candidates are using it.  Frankly, I think, it`s critical for the country.

But right now, we need to talk about the people.  We need to make sure that as Nancy Pelosi says, whoever is our nominee is for the people.  Not for some ideology.  Not for some special interests, but for the people. 

So, let the people decide and stop the circular firing squad.  That`s -- that`s my perspective. 

HAYES:  Robert, what do you think about the idea that a nasty primary, if it happens, isn`t necessarily a fatal or bad thing in the political prospects of a political party? 

REICH:  Well, I think there`s a difference between Democrats and Republicans on this, Chris.  Republicans, by temperament and tradition, are more authoritarian.  They follow the leader.  Once the leader is established, they all line up and they take that Hill. 

I mean, you can see in the Republican Party in the Senate right now, Mitch McConnell is basically a lap dog to Donald Trump. 

HAYES:  Right. 

REICH:  And the Democrats are different.  The Democrats basically, you know, everybody sings their own tune.  And when they fall out, if there`s a big fallout, if there`s a big fight, it`s very hard for people to get back together. 

One out of ten people who voted for Bernie Sanders in the 2016 primaries -- I mean, they voted for Donald Trump in the general election.  And I think that that is partly, partly, this is what I want to respond to the senator about, partly this is a response to the fact that big money is something that is infecting and corrupting both parties and we got to organize ourselves so we are not dependent on big money. 

HAYES:  Yes, one of the things that`s happened -- Senator, go ahead. 

BOXER:  But could I just say, I mean, to say that money is the big issue for those people, that they voted for Donald Trump, who, you know, is God knows what he`s taken --

HAYES:  Right. 

BOXER:  -- you know, on the side during this whole thing with the Emoluments Clause being avoided and the rest of it.  It`s kind of a joke. 

REICH:  Oh, it`s a complete joke.  I mean --


BOXER:  I think --

REICH:  He`s a Trojan horse for big money. 

BOXER:  Yes, I hear you.  But I think they just wanted to rip it up.  You know, let`s just tear it down, rip it up. 

And that`s why they went that way and it was, you know, very, very sad for the country, and they have to look inside themselves and decide whether that was the right thing for them to do.  No matter what I say, it`s not going to change what`s in their heart. 

HAYES:  All right.  Barbara Boxer, and Robert Reich, thank you both for your time tonight.  I appreciate it. 

REICH:  Thanks, Chris. 

BOXER:  Thanks. 

HAYES:  That is ALL IN for this evening. 

"THE RACHEL MADDOW SHOW" starts right now. 

Good evening, Rachel.