Summary
A new reporting from The Daily Beast reveals that Ginni Thomas, a longtime conservative activist, would regularly go to the White House and make insane hiring and firing recommendations to then-President Donald Trump. Today, a Russian official said that two Ukraine helicopters attacked an oil depot across the border in Russia. Today, Attorney General Merrick Garland declined to comment on any potential Department of Justice activity focused on the ex-President. The fallout continues from Rep. Madison Cawthorn`s sex and drugs remarks at a podcast last week.
Transcript
JOY REID, MSNBC HOST: All of you won the week. Thank you so much for being with me for this wonderful, very special show. Juanita Tolliver, Kurt Bardella, Michael Beschloss, all of you won the week. That is tonight`s "REIDOUT." ALL WITH CHRIS HAYES starts right now.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CHRIS HAYES, MSNBC HOST (voiceover): Tonight on ALL IN.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Do you agree with members of your caucus who are saying that Clarence Thomas should resign?
REP. NANCY PELOSI (D-CA): I don`t think he should have ever been appointed.
HAYES: The wife of a Supreme Court Justice wrapped up in Donald Trump`s coup attempt. Tonight, new reporting on the influence Ginni Thomas peddled inside the White House as her husband ruled on Trump cases.
Then, from Ukrainian soldiers liberating a Ukrainian town, to Ukrainian attack inside Russia. What we know about who is actually winning this war.
Plus, why the intra party fight over Madison Cawthorn`s cocaine orgy claims won`t die.
ROGER STONE, TRUMP ADVISER: I can tell you that Madison Cawthorn told me yesterday that he had not retracted what he said.
HAYES: And inside one of the biggest labor victories in decades as Amazon workers in New York vote to unionize when ALL IN starts right now.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES (on camera): Good evening from New York. I`m Chris Hayes. We are getting a clearer picture of the role that the wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, Ginni Thomas, played in the right-wing ecosystem. He`s functioned as a key link between the furthest fringes of the conspiracy theory believing right and the absolute centers of power, including not just the Supreme Court but also the White House.
New reporting from The Daily Beast reveals that Ginni Thomas, a longtime conservative activist, would regularly go to the White House -- that`s during the Trump years -- and make, "Insane hiring and firing recommendations to then President Donald Trump."
She would show up for White House meetings, "Armed with written memos of who she and her allies believe Trump should hire for plum jobs and who she thought Trump should promptly purge."
According to a foreigner, former senior Trump administration official, "We all knew that within minutes after Ginni left litter meeting with the President, we would -- he would start yelling about firing people for being disloyal. When Ginni Thomas showed up, you knew your day was wrecked."
Another former official describes Thomas` memos as, and I quote here, "Dripping with paranoia, and read like they were written by a disturbed person."
OK, step back for a second. Ginni Thomas would regularly just show up at the White House, she would meet with the President of the United States, and she would tell him who she thought he should fire and hire, which of course prompts the question, how did something like this end up with that much power in the first place?
It is hard to get White House meetings. It`s hard to get face time with the president. Ginni Thomas is the kind of person who was able to get that. And she has, I have to say, a fascinating backstory. In some ways, I think a microcosm of a certain generation of conservatives.
So, she comes from a deeply conservative family in Omaha, Nebraska. In fact, somewhat coincidentally, writer Kurt Andersen recalls growing up across the street from her. "My parents are Goldwater Republicans, always disparage her parents as John Birchers, referring to the far-right John Birch Society."
And Ginni Thomas began her career in conservative politics in the early 1980s. He was working for Republican Congressmen when she became involved in well, a cult known as Lifespring. In 1987, the Washington Post reported extensively about Lifespring, which trained members in a series of expensive courses, and cited experts "Who believe Lifespring is a dangerous company that uses psychological tricks to manipulate minds."
Ginni Thomas spoke to the post for that article telling them that she was confused and troubled by exercises such as one in which trainees listened to the stripper while disrobing to skimpy bikinis and bathing suits. The group then stood in a U-shaped line made fun of fat people`s bodies and riddled one another with sexual questions.
Thomas said it took her months to break fully from Lifesprings` "high- pressure tactics." I intellectually and emotionally gotten myself so wrapped up with this group, I was moving away from my family and friends, and the people I work with. My best friend came to visit me and I was preaching at her, using that tough attitude they teach you.
She went on to describe hiding out another part of the country to avoid constant phone calls from fellow trainees who were taught that it was their responsibility to make Thomas keeper commitment to Lifespring.
Now, in 1986, after she escaped the cult and was deprogrammed, Ginni Thomas spoke at an event for former cult members. And it`s really a gripping testimony. She described the very real psychological challenge of not being overly drawn into fighting the cult as a kind of replacement for the cult itself.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GINNI THOMAS, WIFE OF JUSTICE CLARENCE THOMAS: I was in my sleep, and I was -- when I was to be deprogrammed, and I guess coming out of when we talked about it -- the focus of this discussion is on coming out of the cult, there are a number of things that went on for me. When you come away from a cult, you have to find a balance in your life as far as getting involved with fighting the cult or exposing it. And kind of the other angle is getting a sense of yourself and what was it that made you get into that group and what`s -- what open questions today that still need to be answered.
And I think I`m really trying I`m struggling with a balance between that. I want to expose Lifespring. I want to keep other people from going through that experience. But I also don`t want to go overboard in that regard. So, all those things that got me the last few years still there, and the guilt. And I struggled with overboard in fighting cult, but I know that`s important too.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
[20:05:56]
HAYES: Now, the year after that video was filmed, again, very self-aware, very compelling raw emotional testimony there. The year after that was filmed, Ginni married her current husband, Clarence Thomas. He was then the chairman of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
Now, Thomas was nominated to the Supreme Court in 1991 to replace, of course, Justice Thurgood Marshall. He`s now the longest-serving member of the court, and one could argue the most influential member of the court. Ginni Thomas continue to work in conservative politics for the Heritage Foundation during the George W. Bush administration, later founding a lobbying group.
In 2020, Ginni Thomas made headlines of her own when Anita Hill revealed that Thomas had left her a voicemail asking for an apology. And for context, Hill accused Clarence Thomas of sexual harassment during his confirmation hearings, somewhat famously back in 1991. So, Ginni Thomas called Anita Hill asking for an apology nearly 20 years after the fact.
And now you`ve likely seen Ginni Thomas` name in the news again. Again, not because she`s the wife of Clarence Thomas, no, because the Washington Post and paid copies of messages that had been turned over the January 6 Committee revealing that Ginni Thomas sent former Trump Chief of Staff Mark Meadows a barrage of texts in the weeks after the 2020 election urging him to try to overturn the results.
She was pro-coup. She referred to wild far-right conspiracy theories sending Meadows a link to an absolutely just insane YouTube video. It`s since been taken down which was centered around a fake Q anon conspiracy theory referencing Trump staying. The video was by a far-right commentator who also claimed that Sandy Hook massacre was a false flag.
After she texted that video to Meadows, Thomas added, "I hope this is true." She also said that it was a passage that is circulated right wing websites claiming "Biden cried the family and valid fraud co-conspirators are being arrested and detained for ballot fraud right now and over coming days and will be living in barges of Gitmo to face military tribunals for sedition.
Ginni Thomas has also come under scrutiny for endorsing the rally that preceded the insurrection in January 6, writing on Facebook that morning "Watch MAGA crowd today, love MAGA people. Thomas admits that she attended that rally yourself. Although she says she left before Donald Trump began speaking.
Because of all this, because the wife of the sitting Supreme Court Justice was knee deep in the big lie the election was stolen, actively texting Trump`s chief of staff urging him to be more vociferously pro-coup, and because Clarence Thomas, in his role as Supreme Court Justice, already participated in two cases relating directly the 2020 election in the January 6 insurrection, including being the lone dissenter arguing the Trump White House Records should not be sent the January 6 Committee, records which could have included his own wife`s texts.
Because of all that, because of the manifest and obvious conflict of interest, there are calls for Clarence Thomas to resign. There`s a letter from members of Congress demanding at the least he recused himself from any upcoming 2020 election cases. And so, now, the January 6 committee has reportedly preparing to requested interview with Ginni Thomas.
There`s a way you could say that Ginni Thomas is now a member of well, another cult or at least a totalizing belief system if you want to be charitable, which is that of Donald Trump.
But even before Trump, Ginni Thomas`s politics were very clear. She has been a member of the conservative movement for many years. There have long been people who scrutinize Thomas for that as well as those who asked the question of what her work has to do with her husband. Ginni and Clarence Thomas have often called themselves a team. Listen to how Justice Thomas put it in 2018 in an interview for his wife`s online series.
G. THOMAS: And the best part of being a justice?
CLARENCE THOMAS, ASSOCIATE JUSTICE, U.S. SUPREME COURT: First of all, it`s at the impossible without you. And I have to be honest, I think it would be -- it`s sort of like how do you run with one leg. You can`t. I mean, it makes it whole when I have my wife.
[20:10:18]
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: It`s a very sweet and genuine sentiments about a married couple. It`s impossible to ignore the fact that Jamie Thomas has power in Washington in some non-measurable degree to which because of her who her husband is. He`s one of the most important conservatives in all Washington. And this is not my speculation. As Jonathan V. Last put it recently in the Bulwark, "The only reason she was texting the president`s chief of staff instead of being the angry cat lady on Facebook, is because she married a man who got himself appointed to the Supreme Court."
But again, this is not an outlier, Ginni Thomas. Her views are not outlier views. It`s embedded in the nature of the modern conservative movement. And even if Trump isn`t president, that`s the point, because MAGA-ism, that belief system, that totalizing belief system is still just a step away from power.
Asawin Suebsaeng is Senior Political reporter of The Daily Beast. He`s authored that latest reporting on Ginni Thomas` influence inside the Trump White House. And he joins me now. Asawin, set the scene a little bit for her. I mean, it`s a little hard to sort of gauge how much influence this individual had. But anyone who`s got the Chief of Staff of the President`s number has some influence, anyone who get face-to-face meetings with the President, which is a hard thing to get for anyone has some degree of influence. Set the scene for us of what the relationship was like.
ASAWIN SUEBSAENG, SENIOR POLITICAL REPORTER, THE DAILY BEAST: No, absolutely. This is someone who had multiple private audiences and lunches with then-President Trump throughout the years of the Trump administration.
And this is someone who Donald Trump really enjoyed whenever she would come in armed with her fire and hire list because she would spend a good amount of their time flattering him vociferously and also not just sharing with him her personnel recommendations if we were to call them that, but also gossiping with him relentlessly about who allegedly wasn`t a never-Trump or deep state or cultural Marxist within his midst at the upper echelons of the Trump administration and Trump White House.
Donald Trump, according to people we spoke to, some of whom, on the record who were there for this told us that Trump could not get enough of it. And this is of course, while Donald Trump was the most powerful person on the face of the planet.
And Ginni Thomas, as you brought up earlier, has been someone who even if some --what she said sounded rather extreme or fringe, has been someone who is gravitating to the -- basically the center of the center when it comes to the power centers of the Republican Party.
Long before Donald Trump came along and became president, she was promoting Muslim ban-type policies long before Trump-ism and MAGA was even a thing.
HAYES: Right.
SUEBSAENG: So, when this came to what she would urge Trump to purge or hire in her time hanging out in the West Wing, she would hand Trump these lists of people to employ or people to hopefully dismiss immediately. And it didn`t matter that these higher lists that she handed Trump were oftentimes chock full with extremists and bigots.
And in one case, in our reporting, we found that the White House personnel office even determined that one of our lists included a suspected foreign spy who she wanted Trump to hire for a very senior position in the Trump administration. It didn`t matter that all of this was happening and that it was patently -- to use a colloquialism -- kind of insane. She was someone who had the then-President`s ear because she told him what he wanted to hear.
HAYES: Yes, I mean, I`ll read from your reporting here which really jumps out to you. According to a person who reviewed one of Thomas` lists, these are the higher list. One known annotation for mega job candidate noted the individual made to the extreme or offensive jokes in social media that were still visible.
Another of these annotations claim that one recommendation for a Trump administration position was in fact a suspected for an intelligence asset or spy. Also say that over the years, some of the specific names that she compiled and push to Trump of the West Wing have trickled out in the press, among them, Fox News personality Dan Bongino, Trump adulating Sheriff David Clark.
I mean, this was someone who is deeply embedded in the sort of deepest part of MAGA world who wanted the White House to be a MAGA ruled place with a staff that often had a kind of contested relationship to the base. But that is who she is on the role she plays.
SUEBSAENG: Absolutely. And I know what some of your viewers might be thinking right now. They looked at some of those names that you put on the screen and thought, how is that substantively that much different from the people who populated some of the most powerful positions in the Trump White House and in the Trump administration over those four years, and they have a point.
But what Ginni Thomas and her allies tried to do, and were sometimes successful, sometimes they were blocked by people who were working in the Trump White House, what they tried to do was make it even more extreme.
[20:15:14]
HAYES: Right.
SUEBSAENG: For instance, Frank Gaffney was one of the people who Ginni Thomas directly pushed to Donald Trump and had on her lists in terms of someone that he should hire for a counterterrorism or some other sort of plunk position in the administration.
For your listeners -- I`m sorry -- for your viewers who don`t know Frank Gaffney is, he`s one of the country`s most notorious anti-Muslim activists and bigot, even more so than say, Donald Trump.
HAYES: Yes. And over the line, even for the Trump -- the Trump White House in the end which is saying something. Asawin Suebsaeng who`s great reporting on this is in The Daily Beast, thank you very much.
SUEBSAENG: Thank you.
HAYES: Jane Mayer is Chief Washington correspondent in New Yorker. She was one of the first people reporting on GinniThomas` influence back in January this year. Her latest piece is about the legal reaction to Ginni Thomas` January 6 texts. And she joins me now. Let`s start on this on the sort of legal ethical question here. I mean, obviously, look, we`ve said this a million times around this, I think it`s important to say.
Like, no one is responsible for their spouse`s views, their kids views, their family members views. Like, those are the views of family members. They are what they are. Lots of Republicans trying to defend Ginni Thomas now saying this is all just about how are -- you know, she`s married to Clarence Thomas, what`s the -- to you the legal sort of ethical crux of the issue here?
JANE MAYER, CHIEF WASHINGTON CORRESPONDENT, THE NEW YORKER: I mean, the heart of it is really about Clarence Thomas, and whether or not he has a conflict of interest. And if he has a conflict of interest and he persists in sitting on cases that involve and in a substantial way, his wife, then he stands to, you know, corrupt the image, and possibly that sort of delivery of justice by the Supreme Court.
I mean, it`s a really serious issue that she presents. And even if her ideas seem flaky, the situation that she`s causing is profound and deeply serious. And so that`s why this whole thing matters. If she was just somebody out in the street, or as Jonathan Last said, you know, a cat lady somewhere, it wouldn`t -- it wouldn`t matter at all. But the thing is that, you also have to wonder whether Clarence Thomas shares her views. In interviews in 2011, for instance, he said that he and his wife share all their views. They think alike and they believe in the same things. And that`s one of the reasons that they`re so close.
And we don`t know what Clarence Thomas really thinks. But if he did actually share those views that Ginni Thomas has, I mean, it would be frightening, because among the things that she`s talking about when she`s texting with Mark Meadows is that the opponents of her side of politics need to be arrested, tried for sedition extra judiciously, and put on barges outside of Guantanamo Bay.
I mean, that is not the kind of support for our justice system that we would like to see at the Supreme Court level.
HAYES: Right. I think it`s a really important point here. Like, the views themselves are just beyond the pale, right? That like, saying, I hope this is true when you read some, you know, completely false conspiracy theory that a sort of fascistic purge has happened in which political enemies have all been swept, swept up and sent off on barges and say, I hope this is true, like, that`s a frankly, sort of fascistic fantasy.
You`re actively working on the coup. Like, wherever you are, like, there -- that`s actually a small amount of people in that circle, even in the circles of power that were that pro-coup. I mean, we know a lot of people even in the Trump White House opposed it. It puts you like outside a kind of category of just acceptable views to my mind for anyone, you know, whatever your position.
MAYER: I mean, she is actually, as we were saying earlier, to the right if it`s -- if it`s on a spectrum, exactly. And it`s hard to say if this is even on the spectrum, but she is to the right of Trump. And she was -- she -- you know -- and one of the reasons that the aides in the White House found her so annoying when she came in and tried to fire people was that she wasn`t even for Trump in 2016. She was a big bag Her of Ted Cruz.
And so, she wasn`t an early Trump supporter. And she comes out of a far right wing of the Republican Party that is to the right of where Trump came out of, you know, as you mentioned, Goldwater members and Birch -- John Birch Society members, and very sort of conspiracy-minded people.
HAYES: Jane Mayer who has been doing amazing reporting on this in the New Yorker, thanks for your time tonight. I Appreciate it.
MAYER: Thanks for having me.
HAYES: Tonight, Madison Cawthorn issues a new statement on his cocaine comments. Yes, I think we`re in day four of this, and he isn`t taking anything back. We`ll tell you what he said coming up.
[20:20:08]
Plus, is there a power shift happening on the ground in Ukraine. The new reporting on Ukrainian pushing back and what it means for the Russian offensive after this.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HAYES: We are now in the fifth week of Russia`s invasion of Ukraine. But rather than a swift Russian victory that many expected, the Ukrainian military appears now to be gaining some ground back.
Today a Russian official said that two Ukraine helicopters attacked an oil depot across the border in Russia. You can see the attack in this video verified by NBC News. The Ukrainians Foreign Minister would not comment on his country`s involvement.
This attack marks the first time Russia has reported a Ukrainian airstrike on its own territory since the invasion began. Russia is still waging a brutal offensive in eastern Ukraine. Today, a Red Cross convoy heading to the besieged city of Mariupol was forced to turn back saying that conditions made it impossible to proceed.
[20:25:12]
But the Ukrainian military is also having some success across the country in taking back areas that had been previously held by the Russians. Yesterday, a senior U.S. defense official said the Russians have very likely abandoned an airfield near Kyiv that was captured when they first invaded.
Ukrainian parliament also posted a video they say shows Ukrainian fighters being welcomed in a liberated village of Chernihiv region, the reaction Russian soldiers thought they would get when they enter Ukraine. And today, Chef Jose Andres, founder of the World Central Kitchen posted a video of himself with the mayor of Irpin, a city that was just retaken by Ukrainian forces earlier this week.
Now, the New York Times reports "Ukrainians have large successful but limited counter-attacks east and northeast of Kyiv, blows it may have sped up the Russian pullback once it became clear to Moscow its worsens would not be able to take Ukraine`s capital, according to Western diplomats and independent military analysts.
The Russian pullback is real, these officials and analysts say. MSNBC national security analyst Clint Watts is a distinguished research fellow at Foreign Policy Research Institute. And he joins me now. Clint, it`s -- you know, there`s a lot of fog of war stuff. And it can be very hard to kind of track the map. But it does seem clearly to be the case that in certain areas, particularly around Kyiv, and a few other places, that a story that was Russians taking territory from Ukrainians if slowly inaccurate cost, there are places where they are now ceding ground and Ukrainians are retaking it. Is that right?
CLINT WATTS, MSNBC NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: That`s right, Chris. I think what the Russians were saying a couple of days ago was somewhat true. I mean, they`re always lying to some degree. But this is known as retrograde operations, meaning the Russians will try and maintain contact because they don`t want to just turn their backs and run because that would just open them up to being assaulted from the rear.
So, what you see is some units will stay in contact while other units start to move back and principally, they`re moving back towards Belarus. The question though is and where there`s always that grain of salt and you`d hear that from the Pentagon this week is they could just be refitting these units.
Remember, these are armored divisions that have been in thick battle for a month now taking massive losses. So, it isn`t unusual, the pull unit back, retrofit them, get them resupply, get their armor and equipment back up to try and send them back in later.
The problem for the Russians is they`ve lost so many personnel. They really just can`t regenerate the way most units would. I think their morale is extremely low. Many of the units that came in from Belarus did not know they were even going to invade the day before they invaded. So, I think morale is low.
Separately, when you listen to Vladimir Putin, he`s talking about taking the east. And that`s what he initially said he was going to go after was the Donbas regions. Donetsk and Luhansk goes two regions over there to the east is really what he was going for, he said. I wonder if they`re just going to use these troops and try and bring them around from Kyiv, Chernihiv, and (INAUDIBLE) -- that`s that axis that kind of runs from Kyiv there from west to east -- and resupply those units that are in Kharkiv.
The problem is they`re so decimated and downtrodden. I`m not sure they`re going to have that much of an impact on the battlefield. And I think the question now is how much more combat power will Russia expended just claim the east that they said they`re out for in the beginning.
HAYES: Well, that`s the big question, right? I mean, if the story that the Western intelligence agencies have told, and to the extent that it`s true, it seems to have borne out, I have no independent way to confirm it, is essentially, that this was a regime change invasion, right? That the idea was to roll into Kyiv and essentially knock off the government, replace it with a puppet government, and then maybe leave with this new sort of aligned, you know, puppet state, right?
To the extent that it became clear that taking Kyiv was not possible, I mean, just essentially a battlefield loss. Like, they can`t actually do it with the army they had. It doesn`t seem like they`re going to make another run at that or can do it in some future scenario, right?
WATTS: I agree, Chris. And the other thing to look at is in the south, Kherson. Kherson was where there are better troops were in the south. They stormed very quickly up towards Mykolaiv, but they were repelled by the Ukrainian military. They did the Crimea playbook essentially. They tried to install a mayor, take over the media channels, FSB, Russian intelligence agents, when they`re trying to establish control. They`re struggling even there.
So, when you look at, OK, how would they pick up their game, how would they get back on top of this, that would need more soldiers, more manpower, more equipment. You saw their conscription numbers that came out on April 1st. They were steady state. That`s not particularly higher than any other time they would do that.
They`re calling for foreign fighters and mercenaries from the Wagner group, places like Syria and Hezbollah. This is a trickle. This is just a small number of force. And they`re not going to integrate well, and they`re not doing particularly well when integrated with the Russian military.
And with the number of officers they`ve had die, it`s just -- it`s tantamount to defeat at this point that would think they could actually take and hold any of these areas unless they go just a little bit beyond the Russian border.
[20:30:16]
HAYES: All right, Clint Watts, that was very clarifying. Thanks very much.
Coming up, the new reporting about the missing White House Call Logs which raises more questions. We`ll get to that after this.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[20:35:00]
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Federal Judge David O. Carter had a ruling in recent days in which he said that the former president most likely committed crimes. Have you read that ruling and does it make a difference in the work that the Justice Department is doing?
MERRICK GARLAND, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL: We follow the facts and the law wherever they lead. And that`s all I can say about the investigation. It`s our long-standing norm to not comment on ongoing investigations. The best way to undermine an investigation is to say things out of court.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: Today, Attorney General Merrick Garland declined to comment on any potential Department of Justice activity focused on the ex-President even as we know the department is expanding its investigation into the January 6 insurrection.
For the past week, the biggest open question the broader effort ticket the bottom of that day and the run-up to it has of course been the White House phone logs from January 6. Back on Tuesday, the Washington Post and CBS News posted the official White House diary and call log from that day.
They appear to show a seven-hour gap which is suspicious to say the least, especially considering the lengths that Trump and his allies have gone to in order to block evidence from the six becoming public, compounded, of course, by the fact that Trump`s 2016 campaign was focused primarily on document retention practices, at least as it related to Hillary Clinton`s emails.
The origins of the gap are still somewhat opaque. Were they just using burner phones so none of this got logged. Did they actually tamper with a log after the fact, did they just go dark and not log anything? Was it an accident or intentional?
Today at least according to one report, we may have had an answer, though it sort of raises more questions. "The six pages of White House switchboard logs for January 6, 2021 are complete based on an official review of White House Records. The seven hour gap is likely explained by the use of White House landlines, White House cell phones, and personal cell phones that do not go through the switchboard."
We know from past reporting, the Trump definitely made calls during that gap. He called up Mike Lee accidentally looking for Tommy Tuberville. There may be a technical explanation for why they are not on the official logs that doesn`t involve some kind of like, you know, total Nixonian scrubbing of documents, deleting the tape, yadda, yadda.
The key point, though, is that the gap in knowledge which is the issue, right, the committee is trying to figure out what was happening, what was the President doing, who he was talking to, that gap remains. In order to get a full picture of what exactly the ex-President was doing on the sixth, we need to know who he was talking to and when.
Now, unfortunately, the Republican Party or at least almost all of his members aren`t interested in helping get those answers. Instead, they`re so focused on cocaine orgies. More on that next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[20:40:00]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. JAMIE RASKIN (D-MD): What a massive outbreak of common sense in America against the GOP`s failed authoritarian war on marijuana that depends on paranoid tropes from the 1970s. It`s like they saw reefer madness in middle school and never got over it. I concede our party is not for the kind of cocaine-fueled orgies that have freshmen Republican Representative brags about this week, but we do understand that their marijuana prohibition laws don`t work for our people.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: Everyone in Washington D.C. it seems is talking about Republican cocaine orgies and who can blame them. Whether they exist, who is involved, how we can all unhear those three words. It all started when the young Republican congressman from North Carolina, Madison Cawthorn, went on a podcast last week and told this wild story about members of his caucus.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. MADISON CAWTHORN (R-NC): Look at all these people, a lot of them that I -- you know, I`ve looked up to through my life, always paid attention to politics, guys that -- you know, then all of a sudden you get invited like, oh, hey, we`re going to have kind of a sexual get together at one of our homes. You should come. I`m like , what did you just ask them to come to? And then you realize they`re asking you to come to an orgy.
Or the fact that you know, there`s some of the people that are leading on the movement to try and remove, you know, addiction in our country and then you watch them do, you know, keep up with cocaine right in front of you.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: I love the idea of the sense coming out of someone like, we`re going to have a kind of a sexual thing at our house. Maybe you should come. Those comments have set off a bit of a firestorm from the absolutely innocent Republicans outraged who being linked in any way with these crazy parties Madison Cawthorn says are happening all over the Republican swamp.
His own home State Senator Tom Tillis announced he would endorse a primary challenger against Cawthorn. House Freedom Caucus Chair Scott Perry said in an interview, I think it`s important if we`re going to say something like that to name names, which by the way, I just want to say, I agree. And House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy said Cawthorn told him he exaggerated his remarks.
Now, Cawthorn has been scrambling to figure out a way out of the mess he created, including my favorite, pretending he`s never even heard of cocaine or the word orgy, let alone cocaine orgies. But then his friend Roger Stone says he`s talking to Madison Cawthorn and he knows the truth.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
STONE: I can tell you firsthand that these parties happen. I can tell you that they continue to happen. I can tell you that Madison Cawthorn told me yesterday that he had not retracted what he said even though Kevin McCarthy seems to have popped up in speaking now for the member of Congress saying, oh, he admitted that he made -- no, I don`t think he`s admitted anything of the kind. I don`t think he`s admitted embellishing or retracted anything he said. Alex, he spoke the truth.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: By the way, Roger Stone just said there, just to be clear, I can tell you firsthand, these parties happen, firsthand. Just a short time ago, Congressman Cawthorn released another new statement in which he again does not retract his story, which insinuates his Republican colleagues are involved in illicit activities including key bumps. He just complains that his comments are being used quote by the left and the media disparaging my Republican colleagues and falsely insinuate their involvement in illicit activities like key bumps.
Olivia Beavers is a congressional reporter with Politico. Her latest piece chronicles the fallout from Madison Cawthorn`s orgy and cocaine comments. She joins me now. All right, Olivia, what`s today`s update on this story and the fallout amidst the Republican caucus over a kebab (PH) gate?
OLIVIA BEAVERS, CONGRESSIONAL REPORTER, POLITICO: Well, you know, you just put up a statement from Madison Cawthorn where he seems to be sidestepping taking responsibility for what he said on the podcast. And it`s blaming the left, it`s blaming the media. And here it`s actually not wearing with what he said, which falls into what Kevin McCarthy is really kind of led into them about which is not being truthful.
So, in that interview, he`s also talking about how these were people who approached him about sexual perversion of Washington, one that he looked up to, which is the suggestion that he was talking about Republican colleagues, perceived as Republicans.
So, you know, he then tried to approach it this way and sidestep the issue. It`s unclear if that`s going to really fix the problem for him and the GOP because you really kind of way that surprised me, and I covered them inside and out, they really got angry or jump on it that he was painting them with such a broad brush and insinuating that all of them are all included to partake in this sort of behavior. And none of them wanted to be tied to that sort of activity of orgies or cocaine use.
HAYES: Yes. I mean, I think that`s what`s so certainly revealing and honestly, amusing about this whole thing is like, you know, my general filtration devices like Madison Cawthorn lever -- you know, said something about someone. I`m like, I`m going to take that with a pretty large grain of salt. Like, whatever.
But they`re -- so it`s a little surprising to see them all running around. It`s like, yes, he`s either -- you know, he`s probably not telling the truth. But they`re taking it very seriously. Like, they genuinely seem to not be doing a bit about how angry they are that Madison Cawthorn seems to be saying that they`re all running around going to coke orgies.
BEAVER: No. And you know, what`s sort of interesting is that his reaction is very stark in what we saw after Marjorie Taylor Greene or Paul Gosar had some sort of involvement in the white nationalist rally. For that, that was sort of subdued. McCarthy said he talked to Greene. He doesn`t said that he talk to Gosar.
But instead, you know, we`re seeing the party, we`ve seen the party leader, and even in the Senate, which is where to weigh in on like House scandals, all sort of jumping in and saying, this is not OK, you`re overstepping the line. And so, we`re sort of seeing what really kind of irritated Republicans and their colleagues.
And one thing that I found very interesting is that you have Freedom Caucus members who are upset. If Scott Perry is saying that he`s planning to talk to him, if he wants him to name names, they usually don`t like to be suggested that they`re angry at their own numbers because it`s perceived weakness as someone to, you know, exploit. But here he`s saying it to me. And so, that`s a sign that he`s literally angered, his colleagues on the -- on the more right-wing part of the party and his colleagues all the way more in the moderate side.
HAYES: Scott Perry and I don`t agree on much but I agree with Scott Perry on this and I -- maybe Madison Cawthorn or maybe Roger Stone, everyone agrees. Just say who the guy was or the woman was that said, we`re going to have a "sexual thing at our house do you want to come" and who was doing a key bump. Just say who it was. I think that`s good for all, for transparency, for journalists, for the voters to make informed decisions on who they`re voting for.
Olivia Beavers, I hope this story continues to develop and we can continue to cover it. Thank you very much.
BEAVERS: Thanks, Chris.
HAYES: Next, the incredible improbable story of one of the biggest labor wins in a generation as an Amazon warehouse in Staten Island votes to unionize.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We did it.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Wait, wait, wait a minute. We got to thank Amazon because they made this all possible.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[20:50:00]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CHRISTIAN SMALLS, PRESIDENT, AMAZON LABOR UNION: We got the jugular. We went for the jugular. And we went for the top dog because we want every other industry, every other business to know that (INAUDIBLE), we going to unionize. We`re not going to quit our jobs anymore.
To the first union in American history.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Wait, wait, wait a minute. We got to thank Amazon because they made this all possible.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: Today, Amazon workers at a Staten Island warehouse successfully voted to unionize. That is the first time that has ever happened at any of the company`s U.S. facilities. It may be one of the biggest wins for organized labor in a generation. And it was a battle that was fought tooth and nail.
It`s not the only Amazon warehouse trying to unionize right now. As we`ve covered here on the show before, in Bessemer, Alabama, they just had a do over election after the first was invalidated. The results are still too close to call with over 400 contested ballots remaining.
Now, in response to successful election in New York, Amazon issued a statement that reads in part "We`re disappointed with the outcome of the election in Staten Island because we believe having a direct relationship with the companies is best for our employees." They also indicated they`re considering filing objection, based on what they say they saw as undue influence by the National Labor Relations Board among other options.
[20:55:05]
But this comes amid an incredible shift towards labor militancy across the country. And this victory against Amazon could spell a broader shift in the long-decline of organized labor here in the U.S. Derrick Palmer is one of the people who played a key role in winning that vote. He`s the Vice President of the Amazon Labor Union in Staten Island, and he joins me now.
Derrick, it`s great to talk to you. I know you guys are celebrating and you`re nice enough to take a little time to talk to us tonight. First, how are you feeling?
DERRICK PALMER, VICE PRESIDENT, AMAZON LABOR UNION: I`m feeling excited. You know, this is one of the greatest moments of my life honestly.
How did this -- if people say to you, how did this happen, this is -- people have tried, Amazon fought tooth and nail, they spent $4 million, I think, in trying to make this not happen. What was the key to success here?
PALMER: Well, I will say like our, our direct approach that we have with workers. You know, we are Amazon workers organizing other Amazon workers. So, we understand your struggles, you know. We can all relate to each other. So, I think that`s where it was -- that`s what made it successful.
HAYES: Yes. And when you say that, I just want to put a fine point on this. Well, usually, the way this happens is a union that exists will send professional organizers to help workers inside a place to figure out how to put together a union. It`s a difficult process. That was not the case here. This was entirely grassroots, entirely organic. You and Christian Smalls and a bunch of other people got together and just did this on your own, right?
PALMER: Yes, that`s correct.
HAYES: And what? What was it that made you feel like you were at a breaking point where you wanted to take this on?
PALMER: Well, you know, I`ve been -- I`m employee with Amazon for over six years, and I`ve done everything as far as like, meeting the goals and exceeding all expectations. So, you know, ultimately, I wasn`t able to move up within a company. And then someone who`s been employed with the company about four months, you know, automatically moving up.
So, that mix with the, you know, the unsafe conditions at the -- at the warehouse are ultimately the reason why.
HAYES: Yes. How much -- I know, Chris -- we had Chris Smalls -- Christian Smalls on the -- on the program before talking about the -- about the pandemic and a feeling during the pandemic that, you know, your safety, your health was at risk, and that -- and that the company really didn`t seem sufficiently concerned about that. How important was that in the organizing effort?
PALMER: Yes, you know, the pandemic played a key role. You know, we actually were able to use our cell phones in Amazon, which we normally aren`t able to do. So, that played a key part of organizing.
HAYES: They are saying -- you know, they`re clearly -- Amazon corporate is clearly making noises that they`re going to challenge the result of this. They`re going to fight you tooth and nail. Are you ready for further battles here?
PALMER: Oh, yes. You know, we`ve been technically battling with Amazon for about two years now. But, you know, this is something that we expected. But you know, at the end of the day, you saw the results. You know, we won by over 500 votes. So, I don`t see how their challenge is valid, but, you know, they`re going to do what they have to do, and that`s nothing that we not prepared for.
HAYES: You still work there, right?
PALMER: Yes, I do.
HAYES: What`s it like at work? I mean, how fraught, how intense has this been during this period to go in there every day?
PALMER: Oh, well, you know, obviously, you know, myself you know, being a leader of this movement, you know, I`m very -- I`m very vocal. And, you know, Amazon is well aware of my stance. And, you know, it`s -- you know, obviously, the management, you know, they look at me like a target, but not at the end of the day, I just want what`s best for workers.
So, you know, it doesn`t -- you know, it doesn`t ultimately intimidate me like it made other workers. But you know, that`s why my presence in the building is so vital to this movement.
HAYES: All right, Derrick Palmer, one of the organizers of one of the biggest labor victories, honestly, in a generation. People are saying that who are, you know, labor historians and folks in the labor movement, and people who are labor journalists, so congratulations to you and all the folks there, Derrick. I appreciate it.
PALMER: Thank you, Chris. I appreciate you.
HAYES: All right. So, today, of course, is April 1st which is significant for at least three reasons. It`s April Fool`s Day, number one, which I very much do not celebrate. You`ll notice there was no April tomfoolery in the show. It is also April 1, the birthday of my dear friend and cherished colleague, Rachel Maddow. So, happy birthday, Rachel.
It is also the birthday of ALL IN WITH CHRIS HAYES, the program you`re watching right now, which launched if you can believe it, nine years ago today. And as we enter our 10th year on air, I just want to take a brief moment and thank all the many people who have worked and work now on this show night in night out to make good, informative, compelling television journalism.
And I also just want to thank you at home, some of whom have been watching since that very first night in 2013. I want to thank you for watching and for sticking with us through thick and thin, through insurrection, plague, war, and just about everything else under the sun. We`re truly honored by and thankful for the trust you`ve placed in us.
That is ALL IN for this week. "THE RACHEL MADDOW SHOW" starts with Ali Velshi right now. Good evening, Ali.