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

The Last Word with Lawrence O'Donnell, Transcript 10/20/15

Guests: Jonathan Allen, Cecile Richards, Wendy Davis, Morgan Griffith,Robert Costa, Sam Stein

RACHEL MADDOW, MSNBC HOST: And now, it`s time for THE LAST WORD with Lawrence -- enough to fit comfortably inside a Nissan Sentra. Congratulations Lindsey Graham, you had the best day in all of American politics today by far. That does it for us tonight, we`ll see you again tomorrow, now, it`s time for THE LAST WORD with Lawrence O`Donnell, good evening Lawrence. LAWRENCE O`DONNELL, MSNBC HOST: Good evening Rachel. We have one of those Republican Freedom Caucus members who was in that meeting with Paul Ryan tonight -- MADDOW: Great -- O`DONNELL: We will find out if he thinks he heard enough of Paul Ryan. MADDOW: Excellent, good luck -- O`DONNELL: And one way or the other -- (LAUGHTER) Whether he`s for him or against him because of what he heard. MADDOW: Thanks, Lawrence -- O`DONNELL: Thanks, Rachel. We`re covering the breaking news tonight that Paul Ryan has agreed to serve as speaker of the house, if and only if Republicans in the house unify to support his candidacy by the end of this week. Republican members of the house met behind closed doors for an hour tonight listening to Paul Ryan. A member of the Freedom Caucus who was in that room will join us and tell us whether he`s satisfied with what he heard Paul Ryan say. After that meeting, Paul Ryan held a short press briefing in which he laid down his four conditions for being speaker. Only one of which is actually substantive update house rules. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) REP. PAUL RYAN (R-WI), CHAIRMAN, HOUSE WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE: First, we need to move from an opposition party to being a proposition party. Second, we need to update our house rules and it needs to include fixes that ensure that we do not experience constant leadership challenges in crises. Third, we as a conference should unify now and not after a divisive speaker election. Last point is personal. I cannot and I will not give up my family time. But I pledge to try and make up for it with more time communicating our vision, our message. What I told members is, if you can agree to these requests, and if I can truly be a unifying figure, then I will gladly -- (END VIDEO CLIP) O`DONNELL: Joining us now, Republican Congressman Morgan Griffith of Virginia, he`s a member of the House Freedom Caucus. Congressman Griffith, thank you very much for joining us tonight. You`ve been in the two most important meetings of the night; the meeting of the full group of house Republicans with Paul Ryan and then later a Freedom Caucus meeting. Let`s start with that meeting with Paul Ryan. Did you leave that meeting ready to support Paul Ryan as speaker? REP. MORGAN GRIFFITH (R), VIRGINIA: Well, this is an important decision not only for the house conference, but for the United States of America. And while I heard a lot of good things from Paul and particularly some rules changes that I think are important, I want to sleep on it, and I want to take time to give it a mature consideration. Certainly, Paul said some very good things and I appreciate that, but I do need to sleep on it. I always used to tell clients when I was practicing law, go home and sleep on that before you make a final decision. So, that`s what I`m going to do this evening, take some time to think about it and mold it over. O`DONNELL: And how did the discussion go in the Freedom Caucus meeting after the Paul Ryan meeting. Did he get support in that meeting? GRIFFITH: Well, there`re a lot of questions, and I think most of the members are more concerned about process than they are any individual. We want to make sure the process is working fair. And so, I think a lot of us are going to take some time to think about it and sleep on it as well. But this is something that we`ll have to sort out this week and you`ll see us taking action in that regard. O`DONNELL: Well, process is actually -- as I put it out, the only substantive thing Paul Ryan said in those four conditions. He said, we need to update our house rules. One of the things he wants to change is your ability to challenge the authority of the speaker of the house, and in effect move to vote -- to have a vote to remove the speaker at any time. Is that a condition that you are willing to accept? GRIFFITH: Well, I think we need to take a look at it in a broader sense. We have to take a look at a lot of the rules. Obviously, if there`s some things that takes some power away from a speaker candidate, whomever that might be, then, now, that`s something you have to take a look at. I do believe that a speaker is elected for a term which is no longer than two years. And if that person should not be removed from that office without some good cause or without a significant vote. That being said, right now, the speaker has so much power, it`s one of the few ways that average members can have an impact on the process. So, I`ll be looking for some other rules changes as well. O`DONNELL: OK, so, in other words, you`re saying, you`d be willing to give Paul Ryan that rule change if he gives you a rules changes you would like to see, procedurally that affect your ability to impact legislation. GRIFFITH: Well, I think that`s correct. Now, understand, I`m speaking for myself and not for the Freedom Caucus when I say that, but I do think from my perspective, that is correct. Most of the members of the Freedom Caucus are very concerned about making sure that we have a process that everybody agrees is fair and that it`s not isolated in the upper echelons of leadership. And I think Paul Ryan is in favor of that, we just have to make sure we work that out in the next few days. O`DONNELL: Mo Brooks was on this program last week and he agreed, he basically saying something similar to you. Which is, what matters to him most is process and he would go along with -- he would just agree to disagree with Paul Ryan on several policy issues as long as Paul Ryan is willing to compromise with the Freedom Caucus on at least some, maybe all, but certainly some of your process issues. Could you give us what you would say are the three top process issues that matter to the Freedom Caucus? GRIFFITH: Well, I think, first, do we have a process that everybody agrees is fair, that things don`t just happen in the -- in the back room with a handful of leadership members, and then all of a sudden we`re told this is what we`re going to do. And you all need to be a part of the team. I think we need a more inclusive process that works within our conference. And there`s a number of ways to accomplish that. And that`s probably the number one overarching principle, is that, we want to make sure there is more inclusiveness, that people of both, you know, on our left and on our right within the conference are heard in the conference and not just decisions being made in the backroom by a handful of leaders. O`DONNELL: Would some of the rules changes you`re talking about actually open up legislative opportunities to Democrats, minority party with the minority be allowed a free-your-hand for example, an amendments in the house of Representatives? GRIFFITH: Well, I think if you open it up, and you open up that amendment process for members in general, that would include the minority party. And I think that is part of this. Now, whether that`s one of the rules that ultimately gets changed, that`s yet to be seen. But I do think that it`s a process that would be fair for all parties, whether they happen to be members of the Democrat Party, independents or Republicans. O`DONNELL: And what about the so-called Hastert rule which was really a practice, not so much a rule, in which a Republican speaker should not bring anything to a vote that doesn`t already have a majority of the Republican Caucus voting for it. Is that something you`re going to demand from Paul Ryan? GRIFFITH: Well, I don`t know that I`d call it a demand, it`s certainly something we want to see folks working towards whomever the candidate might be. But we definitely want to make sure there`re more conference discussions where we can find out whether or not there`s a majority of the conference members in favor of something before suddenly it`s thrown on the floor, and we`re told, here it is, vote for it. O`DONNELL: OK, so then, you could conceivably live with a situation in which the speaker and the leadership go to members, they find out that they do not have a majority of house Republicans. Let`s say they find out they have 45 percent of house Republicans, 35 percent something like that. And then, they move out to the other party to see if they can pick up support on the Democratic side. That`s the kind of thing that has been done for generations in the house. Are you saying that as long as they try, first of all, to have open communication with the Republican membership and really poll the Republican membership, find out how much support there is that they would then in your view be free to do business across the aisle with Democrats. GRIFFITH: Well, I think if you have a more open process that may happen in and of itself, but I don`t know that the leadership should necessarily be pushing that. I think it would be unsavory if they only had 35 percent of the Republicans to go over to the Democrats. But if you`re talking about, you know, the house Republican conference being almost evenly split 49-51, then you know, after discussion within the conference, you may be able to work something out. But more of those discussions need to happen, that has not been happening over the last four or five years. And that`s the kind of process that needs to occur in our house. More discussions within our conference, trying to get it worked out within the conference, and then you have to cross certain bridges when you get to them. But most members of the Freedom Caucus would say that you have to stick with the Hastert rule. O`DONNELL: But -- GRIFFITH: And so, we`ll have to see how that works out. O`DONNELL: OK, but what is -- what is unsavory about majority rule in the House of Representatives? GRIFFITH: Well, you know, if you`re a leader of the Republican conference, it`s unsavory for you to be working more with the Democrats than you are with, say, members of your own conference. Even if you like the Democrats better, you ought to be working with the people who you`re philosophically aligned with, and that would be members of your own conference. O`DONNELL: Well, what if that happens, say, two or three times a year out of 300 or 400 times a year? GRIFFITH: Well, I`d love it if we had 300 or 400 substantive votes. That has not been occurring as often as it should. But I look forward to that. I look forward to having more votes on a lot of bills, on the major bills, it ought to be driven by the Republican conference and not be driven by the Democrats conference led by Nancy Pelosi, and that`s what we`re saying. O`DONNELL: Congressman Griffith, did you hear -- did anyone in the Freedom Caucus meeting tonight make a case for supporting Paul Ryan? GRIFFITH: You know, I`m not at liberty to discuss all the discussions that have been had by various members of the Freedom Caucus. But we will be hashing this out over the next few days, and obviously Paul did a nice job this evening, so, one could infer that, but I`m not at liberty to discuss those private conversations. O`DONNELL: When do you think the Freedom Caucus as a group will make a decision? GRIFFITH: Well, Paul said he wanted to know by the end of the week, so I think that you can expect some kind of a decision will be made before the end of the week. O`DONNELL: And have you and the Freedom Caucus made an agreement that you want to reach a unanimous decision by the Freedom Caucus? GRIFFITH: No, that has not been determined nor -- our general rules require 80 percent for us to take a position. So, we wouldn`t be looking for unanimity unless there`s a change in our rules which I don`t think you`ll see this week. O`DONNELL: OK, and just final before we go. If you can`t reach an 80 percent agreement in the Freedom Caucus, does that mean, each member of the Freedom Caucus is then allowed to go out and vote as he or she sees fit? GRIFFITH: That will be correct, yes sir. O`DONNELL: And you`re going to sleep on it. GRIFFITH: Yes, absolutely. O`DONNELL: All right -- GRIFFITH: Always make big decisions after a good night sleep. O`DONNELL: OK, Congressman Morgan Griffith, long day today, sleep on it, and if you have a decision tomorrow, please, come back and tell us. GRIFFITH: All right, will do. O`DONNELL: Thank you very much. Joining us now, Sam Stein, a senior politics editor at the "Huffington Post" and an Msnbc contributor. Also with us, Robert Costa, national political reporter for "The Washington Post", and joining us from Capitol Hill, "Nbc News" Capitol Hill correspondent Luke Russert. Robert Costa, what`s your reading about what`s going on in the house Republican caucus tonight and in the Freedom Caucus? ROBERT COSTA, NATIONAL POLITICAL REPORTER, THE WASHINGTON POST: Ryan is moving forward, he made that very clear. He just wants to do it on his terms with the hard liners on his side, the moderates on his side. He`s setting the pace of this entire discussion, but he is moving towards running for speaker, no doubt about it. O`DONNELL: And is he going to have to run for speaker or is he just going to stand there, Robert, as he said tonight, and have them come to him? COSTA: It`s not about whether he has the 218 votes he needs, his advisors tell me he already has that locked down. It`s about getting to that number closer to 247, the number of house Republicans in Congress. He wants to get 235, 240, so those hard liners who don`t vote for him are on the fence, they`re on the sidelines. O`DONNELL: Luke Russert, Robert Costa is telling us that team Ryan believes they have the votes now. LUKE RUSSERT, NBC NEWS CAPITOL HILL CORRESPONDENT: I think that`s right. I think they believe that Paul Ryan had an outstanding performance tonight in front of his house GOP conference colleagues. I would just caution you, Lawrence, that, the one thing that has been true since the house GOP came back into power in 2011 is nothing is agreed to until everything is agreed to. We`re hearing some drip from the Freedom Caucus members that they do not necessarily like all of the demands that Paul Ryan placed on them. One specifically, a demand to get rid of the "vacate the chair motion". Well, that`s insider baseball. His own spokesperson said that there was a weapon that speakers can`t have pointing at them in order to operate effectively. So, I think that`s something we`re going to have to look at between now and Friday. I can tell you, though, I spoke to one member, who has been around here a while, who said to me that if the Freedom Caucus kills off Paul Ryan, then the conference as a whole is utterly useless. You`re going to see a rallying cry by establishment folks, by conservative folks who respect Paul Ryan and people who see that they can`t keep going on in this chaos to really try and push him forward. Considering that he is sacrificing himself in a sense for this job, Lawrence. O`DONNELL: Sam Stein, the last question that Paul Ryan was asked as he was leaving the room was the only one that he refused to answer. And that was what are these rule changes that you`re talking about? And that is the essence of the negotiation with the Freedom Caucus. And we saw it with Congressman Griffith and we`ve seen with others that they are willing to compromise somewhat on exactly what they`re asking for in rules changes. SAM STEIN, SENIOR POLITICS EDITOR, HUFFINGTON POST: Yes, it`s from my reading of it, Congressman Ryan has not so much put on demands as created a deal with the Freedom Caucus. The deal is this: In exchange for agreeing not to pursue comprehensive immigration reform -- although that really wasn`t going anywhere anyway, he`s asking them to hand over their ax, which is this motion to vacate the chair. And so, that sort of the subtle arrangement that`s happening here. But to say that, that`s the one problem that these members have, I think would be to understate some of the criticism that`s coming in right now. I`ve been a little bit surprised and I guess, personally discouraged, but one of the things that he`s being criticized over is, his demand that he gets time to go see his family on the weekends. Congressman Huelskamp of Kansas have said, that, that sort of an irresponsible demand for a party leader to make. Laura Ingraham, the conservative radio host has almost mocked him on Twitter over it. And you know, on the one hand, they make a point that speaker needs to fundraise, he needs to be out there, he needs to be campaigning. But you know, for them to be pointing at that as an unreasonable demand says a lot about some of the hurdles he still has to clear. O`DONNELL: All right, a quick break, when we come back, some house Republicans say that they are considering retiring, just quitting if Paul Ryan doesn`t become the speaker of the house. And the Republican establishment finally taking Donald Trump seriously, worried that he could go all the way to the nomination. Now, they`re trying to figure out how to assemble an attack ad team against him. And Vice President Joe Biden offers a different recollection, a new recollection about whether or not he supported going after Osama Bin Laden. As the Vice President continues to consider whether he should run for president. (COMMERCIAL BREAK) (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) BILL CLINTON, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: He`s a master brander. (END VIDEO CLIP) O`DONNELL: A master what? Bill Clinton is going to have to be much more careful about what he says about his old friend Donald Trump, the guy whose third wedding he attended. The guy who he encouraged to get into the Republican campaign for president. Because Donald Trump has now taken Bill Clinton`s compliments about him and artfully cut them into a Trump Instagram video. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) CLINTON: He`s a master brander, and he`s the most interesting character out there. And there`s a macho appeal to saying, I`m just sick of nothing happening, I make things happen, vote for me. And I like him. (END VIDEO CLIP) O`DONNELL: Coming up, John Boehner is getting ready to do some of the dirty work for Paul Ryan if Paul Ryan is going to become speaker. (COMMERCIAL BREAK) O`DONNELL: John Boehner wants to get some of the dirty work done for Paul Ryan before Ryan becomes speaker. Here is Boehner saying tonight on "Fox News" that he intends to get a repeal, another repeal of Obamacare through the House of Representatives. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) REP. JOHN BOEHNER (R-OH), SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE: That bill can be on the floor, it could be on the floor as early as this week. If not, it would be on the floor next week. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: So, you`re going to do it? BOEHNER: And we`re going to repeal as much of Obamacare as we can through the reconciliation process, the budget process. Which isn`t all of it, but you can basically gut Obamacare, which is what the house bill will do. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And you`re going to move that forward? BOEHNER: We`re going to move it forward. (END VIDEO CLIP) O`DONNELL: Back with us, Luke Russert, Sam Stein and Robert Costa. Robert Costa, the -- there`s the speaker who people forget is still speaker. And there`s a few things he wants to clean up there in the house, or just demonstrate for house members that they`re trying to do it. And this reconciliation process could actually make it through the house of representatives. It could conceivably make it through the Senate. It might be the only way to get Obamacare repeal legislation of any kind to the President`s desk for a veto. COSTA: It certainly happening. Boehner allies believe, one, it could help unite conservatives during this leadership election. And Boehner wants to get things done before at least at the end of the month including perhaps moving on the debt limit and maybe even looking ahead to government spending. O`DONNELL: And Luke Russert, in the -- was there any discussion of this tonight? What they want to see in the remainder of John Boehner`s days before Paul Ryan takes office? Does any Republican caucus talk about that? RUSSERT: Well, I can tell you that folks close to the leadership are very much aware that hanging the debt limit, which comes due on November 3rd around the neck of Paul Ryan, if he is to get this job by the end of the week would be disastrous. Because he`d be faced with a very difficult challenge right out the gate, becoming speaker the next week at the election date, so if it stays the same. So, expect John Boehner to try and help him out on that. Whether you`re going to see a big bipartisan budget deal before the government is said to run out of money December 11th and during the last remaining weeks of Boehner`s term, I would probably say not as of right now, but who knows? In this latest Obamacare repeal attempt, we`re numbering now to 50s, this is a way of the leadership to try and throw some meat to the more conservative members. But quite honestly, I think at some point, they`ll get blamed for this, too, because this will not have gone far enough. You`re hearing from house conservatives, they want to see the filibuster rule change. That`s not even conservatives, that`s the number two, Kevin McCarthy who`s basically been advocating over at least the last few weeks, get rid of the filibuster. So, until that happens, I don`t think anything would really resonate with these guys, they`re insatiable. O`DONNELL: Let`s listen to what Harry Reid said this afternoon about Paul Ryan. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) SEN. HARRY REID (D-NV), MINORITY LEADER: I`m a Paul Ryan fan, I don`t agree with him on much of what he does. I think what he`s done with Medicare and Medicaid, what he`s wanted to do, I disagree with. But generally speaking, I think that he`s been -- we`ve been able to work with him. (END VIDEO CLIP) O`DONNELL: Harry Reid is a Paul Ryan fan. Sam Stein, Harry Reid obviously trying to kill the Ryan candidacy -- (LAUGHTER) For speaker of the house. STEIN: It`s quite possible, yes. I think this is all relative, right? I mean, what are the other -- I think Harry is looking at the rest of the options available to congressional Democrats and freaking out a little bit. Because as Luke pointed out, the debt ceiling is coming through, we have a highway trust fund that needs to be funded, the budget bill that was just passed, it`s a short term bill end of December. So, there are big, meaty things that Harry Reid realizes have to get done and Paul Ryan is probably the last potential partner to get them done with them. Keep in mind, we`ve lived the last two years with a budget deal that was negotiated by Paul Ryan and Patty Murray which alleviated some of the sequestration. Conservatives hate that. But it is something that was done with Paul Ryan and Senate Democratic leadership. So, it is workable from Reid`s perspective, but still not ideal. O`DONNELL: Luke, I got to come back to this seriously, congressional leadership, experienced congressional leadership; house and Senate, know that every word they say matters. RUSSERT: Sure -- O`DONNELL: Harry Reid knows that if he really wants Paul Ryan to be the next speaker of the house, he should not say a word -- UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Anything -- O`DONNELL: About Paul Ryan. (LAUGHTER) I mean, Robert Costa, he -- Harry Reid saying, I`m a Paul Ryan fan, we`ve been able to work with him. That is the most damaging thing Harry Reid could possibly have said today about Paul Ryan`s candidacy. That is something -- COSTA: Certainly -- O`DONNELL: You say if you want to leave the House of Representatives in this chaos. COSTA: And when I have spoken to house Democrats today, they say they`ve been grabbing buckets of popcorn, they enjoy the chaos and to see Ryan play a hardball with his own conference, that has startled Democrats. You have to watch right now what the Freedom Caucus is going to do. I just spoke with the leaders of the Freedom Caucus a few minutes ago, and they know they can`t really beat Ryan. Their own candidate Dan Webster from Florida, former state house speaker, he doesn`t have much of a chance. So, it`s not about beating Ryan at this moment, it`s -- can you edge him out of the race? Can they stand together as a block and say we`re not going to be unified with you and does that force Ryan out? That`s their play it seems at the moment. O`DONNELL: And now we have some moderate Republicans grumbling that they might just retire if Paul Ryan doesn`t get the speakership. The stakes couldn`t be higher this week. I`ve got to take another break here, Luke Russert, thank you very much for joining us. Coming up, a group of Republicans are now so worried about Donald Trump getting the Republican presidential nomination that they have finally decided to go on the attack against Trump. (COMMERCIAL BREAK) O`DONNELL: Well, Donald Trump entering his 100th day at the top of the Republican presidential polls. The Stop-Trump movement in the Republican Party is still just trying to get started. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The Republican establishment for the first time saying off the record, this guy could win. I have heard that from everybody. There -- I don`t hear anybody saying he can`t win the nomination anymore. (END VIDEO CLIP) O`DONNELL: "Nbc News" Perry Bacon Junior reports today, "former South Carolina Republican Party Chair Katon Dawson is beginning discussions with GOP donors to start raising money for a new Super PAC to take on Donald Trump in his home state." The "Washington Examiner" reports that the Conservative Club for Growth hopes to run attack ads against Trump in Iowa. Club for Growth President David McIntosh is looking for donors to fund an anti-Trump campaign that would hit hard in the month before voting begins. It might be a Club for Growth production or it might be a combination of efforts. There is no other group that has decided to do it, says McIntosh. There are a large number of donors and political activists who want to do it. The Club for Growth spent $1 million running negative ads against Donald Trump in Iowa in September and early October. Here is a sample. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Which presidential candidate supports higher taxes, national healthcare -- LAWRENCE O`DONNELL, MSNBC HOST OF "THE LAST WORD WITH LAWRENCE O`DONNELL" PROGRAM: There is a large number of donors or political activists who want to do it. The "Club for Growth spent $1 million running negative ads against Donald Trump in Iowa in September and early October. Here is a sample. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) UNIDENTIFIED MALE SPEAKER (voice-over): Which presidential candidate supports higher taxes, national health care and the Wall Street bailout? It is Donald Trump. (END VIDEO CLIP) (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) DONALD TRUMP, (R) PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: In many cases, I probably identify more as a democrat. (END VIDEO CLIP) (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) DONALD TRUMP, (R) PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Trump wants us to think he is "Mr. Tell It" like it is, but he has a record, and it is very liberal. He is really just playing us for chumps. Trump, just another politician. (END VIDEO CLIP) O`DONNELL: Joining us now, Jonathan Allen, Chief Political Correspondent for Vox. Also with us Robert Costa and Sam Stein. Jonathan Allen, what took them so long? (LAUGHING) JONATHAN ALLEN, VOX, CHIEF POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, look, they tried it before, it did not bring Trump down at all. I think they have been -- you know, there is the establishment is the David against the Donald Trump goliath. I do think it is interesting the "Club for Growth" is getting in here at Katon Dawson, South Carolina, starting to -- trying to put together a Super PAC. You know, the "Club for Growth" is -- there is a lot of overlap between that group and the donors for the Koch brothers. So, it will be interesting to see if they get engaged or if they sort of sit this one out and let the republican nomination move forward. But, this is going to be as interesting and as exciting or at least close to as interesting as exciting as the Paul Ryan run for speaker. O`DONNELL: Yes. Now, the "Club for Growth" has its own polling in Iowa and they say that their ads there have pushed Trump down to below Ben Carson. They, actually, have the most recent poll in Iowa at October 4th. They showed Trump at 16. Carson at 21. Rubio at 11. Jeb Bush at 10. But, we are going to have to wait for some more reliable polls about that. Robert Costa, if the Koch Brothers do not want Donald Trump, if the massive world of republican money does not want Donald Trump, why has all that money, all that activism, all that power been sitting on the sidelines and holding their fire on negative ads. ROBERT COSTA, POLITICAL WRITER AT "THE WASHINGTON POST": Because so many of these candidates` Super PACs do not want to spend the money at this moment in the race, hoping Trump will implode. I spoke to a Trump ally today. He said the Trump campaign is most concerned about Jeb Bush`s Super PAC. When does that $100 million machine turn against Trump. Trump`s decision in this race is when does he actually spend his own money on the airwaves. At the moment, per people close to him, Trump`s thinking is better to run a grassroots campaign and focus on the air. But, he is leaving it as an option in January and February. O`DONNELL: Sam Stein, the Jeb Bush Super PAC now has the record of being the most patient Super PAC in the history of presidential campaigning. (LAUGHING) When your candidate is sinking, that is when the Super PAC is suppose to go to work. SAM STEIN, MSNBC CONTRIBUTOR: Yes, correct. Although, I give them some credit. They have spent some money. It has done very little, in fact it has not done anything. He has gone lower in the polls since then. But, to go back on what Robert was saying. One of the reasons these candidate, Super PACS, have not gone after Trump is that they need to spend the money propping up their own candidate. If you are Jeb Super PAC affiliates, and you are looking at the situation, why would you spend $5 million to $10 million taking out the frontrunner when your guy is sinking. You need to lift him up, make his numbers better, so that he can benefit for when Trump declines. And, there is no indication right now that Jeb would actually be the primary beneficiary if Jeb decline. It could be anyone from Rubio to Kasich to even Christie. O`DONNELL: Jonathan Allen, Donald Trump`s candidacy has done a great job of breaking political rules. One of the political rules is that negative advertising works, that is why people spend so much money on it. But, when I look at that negative ad from the "Club for Growth," it is all about his past. It is all about -- well, you know, he used to say this and, you know -- But it seems to me that what matters for Trump -- what matters for Mitt Romney with republican primary voters is, what is he saying now? You know, they all knew. They all knew that Mitt Romney used to be pro- choice. He used to be in favor of a woman`s right to choose her own reproductive -- to make her own reproductive decisions. And, he changes mind about that. They know -- they may know Trump changed his mind about that. The present tense seems to be the only thing that matters with republican primary voters. ALLEN: Well, it is amazing when you get a Washington-based group, the "Club for Growth," running ads saying -- that sound like typical political ads saying that Donald Trump is a typical politician, when he is anything but the typical politician. It is pretty easy for him to refute the idea that these are the guys that are truly with the grassroots and the outsider energy that is in the campaign right now. So, I think it is hard to go after him. When you hit him, the group that supports them, that 25 percent of the Republican Party roughly that has been with them all along, it just gets more solid it seems. O`DONNELL: The control room tells me we have a hot off the presses new sound bite from Donald Trump on Fox News tonight talking about negative ads against him. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) TRUMP: You just hope when people are watching these phony`s ads, you know, all of these phony ads that are going to be put out, that they are going to understand. It is not the candidates. It is all of these special interests, Sean, that want to not have a guy like Trump because they are going to be out of business. (END VIDEO CLIP) O`DONNELL: Robert Costa, OK, there we go. That is going to be his counter to the negative ads. (LAUGHING) COSTA: It is. And, Trump really believes he can continue to run as a political outsider. And, the attacks from the "Club for Growth" and other groups do not harm his campaign. Trump`s whole play right now is to be in it with the long game. Build an organization in Iowa, New Hampshire. Look to those southern primaries on March 1st. Prepare for the March primaries and be ready to win and just hope others fall away. O`DONNELL: Trump also tonight on Fox eliminated all conceivable question of possible independent run by him. Talking about, "What would he do if Jeb Bush became the nominee. Let us listen to that. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) SEAN HANNITY, FOX NEWS CHANNEL`S HOST OF "HANNITY" PROGRAM: If Jeb wins the nomination, will you support him? TRUMP: Absolutely, yes. I would absolutely support him. He is a good person. He is a good man. I would support him. (END VIDEO CLIP) O`DONNELL: Sam Stein, so much for the renegade. That is the textbook republican candidate answer. STEIN: Yes. When he had signed the pledge, I did not think he was particularly interested in keeping the pledge, but I guess he is. And, I supposed it is ironic a bit that he calls Jeb so low energy. And, saying, he would vote for him. But, yes, I guess Trump is a team player now. O`DONNELL: And, Jonathan Allen, the Trump campaign, is the reluctance to go after Trump with negative ads the notion that, at some point we are going to have to get the Trump voter? And, by the way, is not that what the Super PAC is for? They go after Trump with negative ads and that does not get associated with Jeb Bush`s campaign or some other campaign? ALLEN: Well, I think everybody is hoping that somebody else will be the one that spends the money and takes the risk of going after Donald Trump with Super PAC money. And, look, there are really two campaigns that have the ability to do that. One is Jeb Bush`s campaign, his Super PAC with its tens of millions of dollars in the bank. And, then the other one is Ted Cruz. Ted Cruz is a candidate who is hoping that Donald Trump goes away. He gets all of those Donald Trump voters or the lion`s share of them. So, Ted Cruz is not going to do it. And, basically, I think Jeb Bush does not want to spend all that money on Donald Trump. I think Sam was saying earlier, maybe it was Robert -- basically if you are going to spend that Super PAC money for Jeb Bush, you are going to try to raise yourself a little bit before you go after someone else. O`DONNELL: And, Robert Costa, these are highly informed voters, and I assume, in Iowa and New Hampshire. If Jeb Bush`s Super PAC does that, the Super PAC is not going to say, "This ad paid for by the friends and supporters of Jeb Bush, but we are." And, everyone in Iowa and New Hampshire is going to know that. COSTA: That is exactly right. When I sat down with Trump, I said "How are you going to deal with this barrage of ads that is certainly going to come in the winter and early next year?" And, he said, "My whole game plan is, if they come at me with an ad at an early state or nationally, I will go on any television program and counter it." He thinks he can overwhelm the race with liveliness and counter anything that comes at him. It is a different paradigm. He has changed the whole way these campaigns are run by candidates. O`DONNELL: Sam Stein, Robert Costa, and Jonathan Allen, thank you all for joining us tonight. ALLEN: Thank you, Lawrence. O`DONNELL: Coming up, the head of Planned Parenthood Cecile Richards and the former Texas State Senator, Wendy Davis will join us to discuss the latest move by Texas State government to try to shut down Planned Parenthood in that state. (MUSIC PLAYING) (COMMERCIAL BREAK) (MUSIC PLAYING) (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) JIM WEBB, (D) PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I am withdrawing from any consideration of being the Democratic Party`s nominee for the presidency. Though, I am not going away, I am thinking about all my options. (END VIDEO CLIP) O`DONNELL: When Jim Webb considers the option of running for president as an independent, he will discover that it is more expensive and more organizationally challenging than running an underachieving campaign for the democratic presidential nomination. And, he will no doubt return to the pleasures of private life. We are in the 12th week of active speculation about Joe Biden running for president. There are the off the record rumblings we are hearing this week that his decision could be announced soon, maybe in the next few days. But, today, the Vice President offered a new version of the advice he gave President Obama about executing the raid to get Osama Bin Laden. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) JOE BIDEN, CURRENT U.S. VICE PRESIDENT: I told him my opinion, that I thought he should go but follow-his own instincts. (END VIDEOC LIP) O`DONNELL: In 2012, "The New York Times" quoted Joe Biden saying, "Mr. President, my suggestion is do not go. We have to do two more things to see if he is there." Now, maybe they did those two more things. And, then Joe Biden said "Go." We will surely hear more about this, when and if Joe Biden becomes a candidate for president. Up next, Planned Parenthood`s President Cecile Richards and former Texas State Senator Wendy Davis will join us. (MUSIC PLAYING) (COMMERCIAL BREAK) O`DONNELL: Texas State health officials believe they have found a new way to drive Planned Parenthood out of Texas. The Inspector General of the state`s health services commission has sent a letter to Planned Parenthood in Texas saying, "Planned Parenthood is no longer capable of performing medical services in a professionally competent, safe, legal and ethical manner." The letter cites videos of Planned Parenthood facilities that were secretly recorded and edited in an attempt to show how Planned Parenthood profits from the sale of fetal tissue to medical research facilities. Other states, Georgia, Indiana, South Dakota, Massachusetts have studied those same videos and have found no evidence that Planned Parenthood has profited by the transfer of fetal tissue research or broken the law in any way. None of the Planned Parenthood facilities in Texas preserve any fetal tissue for research purposes. The last time Planned Parenthood clinics in Texas provided fetal tissue for research was in 2010 when it partnered with the University of Texas Medical Branch for a study on miscarriage. The University of Texas Medical Branch is, of course, a state-run university funded by the government of Texas. Joining us now Cecile Richards, the President of the Planned Parenthood and Wendy Davis, a former Texas State Senator, who in June 2013 made national headlines by filibustering a bill restricting access to abortions in Texas. Cecile Richards, this is the latest shot at Planned Parenthood in Texas. And, it reads to me, what they are trying to do is prevent Planned Parenthood from normal Medicaid reimbursements for all of the services it provides for Medicaid patients. CECILE RICHARDS, PRESIDENT OF THE PLANNED PARENTHOOD: Correct. O`DONNELL: That if that happens, does that drive planned parenthood out of business completely in Texas? RICHARDS: Absolutely not, Lawrence. And, again, this is just the latest in the series of political moves by both the legislature and the governor to try to end women`s access to health care in Texas. Planned Parenthood, we see about 150,000 patients every single year. We just opened up new health centers in Dallas and in San Antonio. And, we are going to be there. I think what is really distressing about this move, this political move by the governor is, it is basically saying to women who are on Medicaid, "You cannot go to Planned Parenthood for cancer screenings, for birth control, for STD testing and treatment. And in many areas of the state, we are the best provider that exists. Again, I think we have seen in Texas the danger of putting politics ahead of women`s health care access. O`DONNELL: Wendy Davis, do you expect that the health commissioner -- that they will actually effectuate this? They will be able to deny Medicaid reimbursement to all Planned Parenthood facilities. WENDY DAVIS, FORMER TEXAS STATE SENATOR: I think they are going to attempt to do that. I think in the long-term, they are going to find that they are going to meet a roadblock in the law. Because when you look at this particular order, it is basically the governor and the health and human services commission playing judge and jury. On trumped up videos that, of course, we know have been proven to be highly manipulated to try to show something that indeed has not happened and is not happening in any clinics in Texas. And, they are doing it obviously for political reasons. As Cecile said, the real tragedy here is that women in Texas are going to be hurt, women who are on Medicaid. And, this is a pile on of years of an assault against Planned Patient Hood in the state of Texas, added to the 2011 clinic closures, the family planning clinic. Not abortion clinics, but the over 70 family planning clinics that were closed in Texas. This is insult to injury in a way that has very real impact on women`s health in our state. O`DONNELL: And, Bobby Jindal`s administration in Louisiana tried pretty much the same thing and Planned Parenthood in Louisiana was able to go into federal court and stop it at least temporarily. RICHARDS: Right. I mean that is the irony of this. And, this shows the political nature. This is, literally, the day before, a federal judge have said, "You cannot cut women in Louisiana off of the ability to go to Planned Parenthood for preventive care." That is what this is about. He said, it would cause harm to women. And, the next day, without missing a beat, Governor Abbott announces this. This is clearly a political move in his effort, frankly, to end Planned Parenthood. That is not going to be successful. The only folks that are really going to get hurt are the women of Texas who need access to preventive care. O`DONNELL: And, Wendy Davis, one of the things that these Texas governing authorities keep saying is, "We do not need Planned Parenthood. We have plenty of other clinics. People have access all over this state to plenty of other clinics." DAVIS: You know, what we saw, again, going back to 2011 when there was an assault on Planned Parenthood and a wholesale withdrawal of women`s health program funding for family planning clinics in Texas was that, over 50 percent of women are now reporting at least one barrier in accessing reproductive care in our state. In that period of time, 25 percent fewer patients were served in family planning centers in our state, because there really is no safety net. There is really not an abundance of other clinics available for women to go to, particularly women in West Texas and South Texas, where there are very few reproductive, or any kind of health care clinics for women to be able to access. O`DONNELL: Cecile, Planned Parenthood is now the honor of becoming kind of the next Benghazi style committee target in Washington. We are going to take a break. I will come back to talk to you and Wendy Davis about that. Coming up, Cecile -- we are going to find out about this house committee that is going to design to investigate Planned Parenthood. That is coming right up. (MUSIC PLAYING) (COMMERCIAL BREAK) (MUSIC PLAYING) (BEGIN VIDEO CLP) REP. CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, (D) MARYLAND: Mr. Chavitz just announced the results of all the hearings on Planned Parenthood. No violation of the law. And, so what do you do when you do not get the answer you want? Let us spend more taxpayer money on another special committee. (END VIDEO CLIP) O`DONNELL: That was Congressman Chris Van Hollen reacting to the new republican-led special committee that will investigate abortions and fetal tissue procurement. Back with us, Cecile Richards and Wendy Davis. Cecile Richards, everyone is saying this is basically the Planned Parenthood investigative committee. RICHARDS: Well, I assume that it will be. It is incredible that they are now five committees in congress investigating Planned Parenthood and abortion. E, in Planned Parenthood, we have provided thousands of pages of documents. We have completely cooperated with everything, and as we have seen, they said they found no wrongdoing, and yet it continues on and on. You would think congress would have something better to do with their time. O`DONNELL: Wendy Davis, one of the political phenomenon that we are noticing now in the polling is that the candidacy of Carly Fiorina in polling has collapsed. The big bubble that she had has disappeared. She has dropped about 10 points in the last round of polling. And, one of her star turns, big attention-getting things was actually lying about what she says she saw in a video of one of these surreptitious videos of Planned Parenthood. Whatever she saw was not in a video done by any of the people involved in the Planned Parenthood secret videos. Do you suspect that basically being kind of caught that way on that subject would have hurt her with republican voters in these polls? DAVIS: I absolutely do. I think she got caught lying. I mean, they made a video to try to disprove that she was lying, but the video itself was a fraud. And, people came to see that very clearly. And, thankfully, the press really pushed her on it and held her accountable to it. And, I think that, that is the danger that many of these politicians are not yet really aware of or seemed to be cognizant of. The danger that they are going to push so far -- and I think the American people are waking up to what this is. It is a witch hunt against Planned Parenthood leading to a desire to ultimately end abortion in this country. But, this is a constitutionally protected right, just as other constitutionally protected rights are. And, in the process, what I think people waking up to and certainly it is happening in this state and elsewhere, very real women, very real women, are being hurt by this. These are politicians that are literally willing to put women`s lives at risk, so that they can score political points. And, I certainly hope that we are going to see more and more of the response that we saw to Carly Fiorina and the assertions that she was making by the American public, who I hope is going to sit up and say, "We are tired of this. We see through it. We want real leaders, who are going to represent all of the people in this country and the myriad of needs that they have and not be so concerned about political posturing, that they are willing to literally put people is lives at risk for it." O`DONNELL: Cecile Richards, it looks like your organization is going to be subject to this special committee investigation. What is it like to be in that chair? You have been in that committee hearing witness chair. It is kind of an iconic position now in our television coverage of Washington, the person in that difficult moment in that chair. Was it like -- I mean you have been in for hours the last time around. RICHARDS: Look, I am always proud to represent "Planned Parenthood." And, I was frankly glad to be there to try to give voice to the millions of women who come to Planned Parenthood every year for health care services. I was dismayed in how little interest there seemed to be by members of congress about the actual -- our patients and the services that we provide. But, I will go anywhere, anytime to be able to actually give voice to the needs that women have in this country for affordable health care. I think what is important, too, Lawrence, that folks understand, all of these efforts, they are not really just against Planned Parenthood, they are really attacking the 2.7 million people who come to us every single year for health care. And, what congress is doing is really trying to end access for women in this country to go to the best, most affordable provider that they choose to go to and for 2.7 million of them, that is Planned Parenthood. O`DONNELL: Well, whenever they do not let you finish your answers, you can always come here. RICHARDS: I appreciate the time. Yes. Ask the question and answer it. Yep. O`DONNELL: Cecile Richards and Wendy Davis, thank you both for joining us tonight. RICHARDS: Thanks, Lawrence. O`DONNELL: Chris Hayes is up next. END