LAWRENCE O`DONNELL, MSNBC HOST: That`s correct. From Washington tonight.
And, Rachel, it`s so fascinating to hear Senator Blumenthal say that, because he`s a former attorney general of Connecticut. He`s a careful speaker in these kinds of spots. And he`s talking about the possibility of more criminal charges and the word`s Donald Trump Jr. are right there in the middle of what he said. He knew he was saying that.
RACHEL MADDOW, MSNBC HOST: Yes, and you know, the question that I had asked him, I asked him kind of a long compound question, but the point of it was has the special counsel been asked for or obtained official transcripts of other witnesses who have spoken before your committee and he was like, I cannot talk about us and the special counsel, but let me tell you I was there behind closed doors in this testimony.
And if people are getting in criminal trouble for lying to Congress, Donald Trump Jr. is one of them that may be in trouble for that. Just very straightforward, very blunt.
O`DONNELL: And, Rachel, in addition to Senator Elizabeth Warren, in her very, very first, MSNBC appearance as a presidential candidate at 10:00 p.m., she -- we also -- at 10:00 p.m., I was going to say that really quietly, Captain Sully Sullenberger is going to be here. He really was outraged at what he saw happening to the air traffic system during the shut down, and he`s going to tell us that it`s really not over. There`s some damage. There`s some costs that were incurred in that shut down that we`re going to continue to live with for a while to put it mildly in our air traffic system.
MADDOW: Get to it my friend, thank you.
O`DONNELL: Thank you, Rachel.
Well, America got the bill for the government shut down today, $11 billion. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that that is how much the economy lost during the longest shut down in history. The person who caused the shut down told "The Wall Street Journal" today he just might do it again. President Trump told "The Wall Street Journal" there was what he called a 50/50 chance that he would shut down the government again on February 15th, when the government funding, the current government funding runs out.
Now that the shut down is at least temporarily over, speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi invited President Trump to deliver the State of the Union Address next Tuesday evening, and the presidential campaign was officially joined this weekend by another campaigner, California Senator Kamala Harris, made it official yesterday before a crowd of over 20,000 in Oakland, California.
We are joined tonight by presidential candidate and Massachusetts senator, senior senator, Elizabeth Warren.
Senator, thank you very much for joining us.
SEN. ELIZABETH WARREN (D), MASSACHUSETTS: Thank you. I`m delighted to be here.
O`DONNELL: So, Tuesday night at 9:00 p.m., there`s a speech going on on the capitol. Will you be there?
WARREN: You bet. I`m going to hear it. I think that`s my responsibility is to be there, to see it in person, straight back at that guy.
O`DONNELL: What should -- after the longest shut down in history, what should the president of the United States have to say about that in his State of the Union Address?
WARREN: Look, what he should have to say is that he`s sorry but the chances of that happening are somewhere south of zero. I spent today with federal workers who were a combination of delighted to be back at work and really angry about how they have been treated. I talked to one worker who said she opened up her e-mail and she had 1,200 unread e-mails. She said I won`t be able to get all my e-mails caught up in three weeks.
I talked to another federal worker who is the primary bred winner for her family. She has three little kids, and she talked about what it meant not to get her paychecks that her work colleagues who were out of work were actually calling her and sending money over. That she couldn`t make her rent and as she put it, her landlord was saying, look, what am I going to do? I got to make payments on the building.
It was just one tale after another of harm, and for what? So that the president could have a big national tantrum? This is not how we should treat federal workers and they should not be a bargaining chip in a Republican political game.
O`DONNELL: Well, he seems to have introduced the possibility that they will be a bargaining chip again on February 15th when this funding runs out. But there were reports over the weekend that your Republican Senate colleagues sent the message to the White House. There will be over 70 votes the next time Chuck Schumer tries to bring up that bill that Nancy Pelosi sent over. The Republicans apparently were going to stampede in favor of it. They were going to reopen the government if the president didn`t.
WARREN: Well, all I can say is I sure hope so, because that is our responsibility is to keep the government open and functioning, keep people who are working, paid for their work, and to keep people able to do their jobs and getting paid for that as well. And the same for federal contractors and the same for all the people who, you know, run the food trucks and the restaurants outside where federal work is going on.
It really is the case. This is an injury. This is -- you know, it`s the classic shooting yourself in the foot, and part of the cost, yes, it`s economic, yes, it`s what it does to federal workers, it`s also what it does to faith in government, both here at home and around the world.
The whole rest of the world watched and said you can`t keep your act together any better than that, to the president of the United States of America, you can`t even keep the wheels on enough to keep this thing moving forward? So I really hope that it`s just more bluster when he says that he may shut it down again in three weeks. I don`t know. But I know this, the American people, Democrats, Republicans, and independents do not want our federal workers shut out of their jobs, and they do not want to force them to show up to work and not get paid.
O`DONNELL: How much Trump wall funding are you willing to vote for in the next budget bill that comes through the Senate?
WARREN: Look, none.
WARREN: Look, I just think the wall makes no sense at all. It is not about border security. I`m in favor of border security. We can negotiate about border security.
The wall is a monument to hate and division. That`s what it`s about. It`s a symbol. It`s a way of trying to divide people, turn people against each other, and that`s not who we are as a country.
We want security. We can have that conversation, but not just ugliness.
O`DONNELL: The acting attorney general, Whitaker, said that the Mueller report, he used language that it could be ready soon that the investigation could be over soon. You have a bipartisan bill now developing in the Senate with Chuck Grassley, and I think it`s Senator Blumenthal to basically make sure that the Mueller report is public.
O`DONNELL: Do you support that? Do you believe that`s going to have majority support?
WARREN: Yes, look, I support it whether it has majority support, I`m not sure yet, and of course the problem always is if Mitch McConnell won`t bring it up for a vote, we can`t get it voted on. I believe we have to protect Mueller. I still think we should be protecting Mueller, but I absolutely think that report has got to be made public. That`s how we`ll know what the right next steps are.
O`DONNELL: There`s an old Governor Mario Cuomo saying that you campaign in poetry and you govern in prose. You seem to be governing or campaigning in prose also. What Cuomo meant was the campaign is filled with general good sounding lines but not that much specific, not that much policy.
You seem to be coming in policy first, front loading this campaign with policy, you were frontloading before you announced in the last six months, the latest of the Warren proposal of trying to tax wealth, not just wealth, but what we call super wealth, wealth accumulation above $50 million. This has gotten more attention than any policy yet announced by anyone in this campaign, and a lot of it is some pretty heavy attacks on you.
O`DONNELL: But what is your case for this wealth tax, which is not a form of taxation the federal government has tried before.
WARREN: That`s right. It is new, except, do keep in mind, let`s just talk a little fairness here. Middle class America has been paying a wealth tax forever. It`s called a property tax on their principle accumulation of wealth, which is their home.
O`DONNELL: Yes, state taxation. They absolutely do tax wealthy.
WARREN: And all this one says is let`s do it at the federal level, and how about we`ll also tax your diamonds and your yachts and your art collection and all of those other ways that people accumulate wealth because for me, there`s a fundamental fairness question here.
Think of two people, one of them inherited just gobs of everything, and enjoys it all. The second one is a public schoolteacher, doesn`t have a penny in the bank, who`s just made it through college. Let`s just say both of them earn $50,000 a year in their respective work. They would pay exactly the same in taxes even though their economic circumstances are widely different.
And in fact, the fact that we don`t tax wealth is one more way in which the system has been rigged by the rich and powerful for the rich and powerful, so here`s what we know projected this year is the tippy top, the 1/10 of 1 percent will pay in total taxes about 3.2 percent of their total wealth. That`s the whole thing all in. The 99 percent will pay more than double that, about 7.2 percent of their total wealth.
So part of what this is about is just to say the playing field looks like this. Could we just make it look a little bit more like this? Could we just level the playing field a little bit and then here`s the key part. This would produce revenue about 2 3/4 trillion dollars over the next ten years.
How about we invest that in child care so that hardworking families get some relief? How about we invest that in reducing the student loan debt burden so young people who are trying to get a start in life, who want to do start-ups and want to try to buy homes and can`t do it because of student loans get some relief? How about we invest that in a green new deal, to help protect this planet? How about we invest it in the things that help us build a future?
That`s good for our economy, and that`s what the wealth tax is all about.
O`DONNELL: It`s being challenged on enforceability which I have to say when I was staff director of the Senate Finance Committee, that`s one of the first ways I looked at tax policy, can you enforce, whether you think it`s a good idea or not.
So, you mentioned someone`s collection of diamonds or art or other things that can be worth we know hundreds of millions of dollars. What would you -- what would you propose as an enforceability for putting a value on someone`s art collection or whatever it is that you subject this tax to?
WARREN: So do keep in mind, we do this anyway when the ultra wealthy die, so it`s not like we don`t know how to value this stuff. We value this stuff all the time. And frankly, they value it for purposes of insurance, sometimes using it as collateral, people do valuations, the key parts to this proposal says no matter where the property is held, so moving it to Switzerland is not going to change whether or not you`re subject to.
And in fact, that`s an interesting part of how the law is changing around the world, so we`re getting many more reciprocal tax agreements where wealth is located and reports so it`s much more visible. The second part about the proposal is built right into the proposal, is much higher auditing so that the ultra wealthy.
O`DONNELL: You need more IRS personnel.
WARREN: That`s right. W need them generally, but the ultra wealthy on this tax, remember, this is the 75,000 richest families in America, for those folks, there`s going to be a stepped up audit procedure. You keep checking it on a regular basis. You have this much last year and you don`t have this much this year. What happened? But remember on this, yes, it`s going to take a little paperwork, it`s going to take getting people to do the valuations.
But at the end of the day, it`s about saying we`ve got to be more equitable in the distribution of what it takes to run this country and how this country builds opportunity and I`ll throw in one more, about how we think about democracy. You know, part of what I keep talking about a lot is Washington works great if you`re rich. Look at the tax code. Washington works great if you already can hire an army of lobbyists and an army of lawyers and an army of bought and paid for experts, it`s just not working for anyone else. We can`t give up on that.
We`ve got to say we`re willing to say that those who have the most got to pay, 2 percent a year more so that we can take some of that wealth and build opportunity for the rest of our kids. You said, I talk a lot as a wonk, and you`re right. I totally get it. But understand, this is about big structural change and it comes out of an understanding.
My daddy ended up as a janitor, but his daughter got a chance to become a public schoolteacher, a college professor and a United States senator. Because of investments that taxpayers made. I got to go to a college that cost $50 a semester because of the investments that taxpayers made. That`s what created opportunity in this country.
Today, those opportunities are shrinking up. The road is getting rockier for hard working families and, for people of color, the road is rockier than ever. That`s not -- it`s not right, and it`s not sustainable, but here`s the best part, in a democracy, we build a movement, we make the change. We`re the ones who can make this government work again for the people.
O`DONNELL: There`s a lot of criticism of this coming from the right and coming from Rupert Murdoch`s own "Wall Street Journal." That`s respectable and we`re going to have plenty of time to discuss that. That`s going to follow you throughout the campaign.
The first criticism I would like you to consider is coming from a synthetic critic who appreciates what you`re after, a "Washington Post" editorial saying why not tax the income on the wealth, which is something we already know how to do, why not tax the income on the wealth and make it a higher tax, whatever that is, instead of trying to go into this evaluation game on the wealth which we`re not sure we know how to do?
WARREN: Because then you just get people to distort over to things that don`t produce income. Diamonds don`t produce income. Art work doesn`t produce. A yacht with an IMAX theater does not produce income.
And the distortions are not what we`re looking for. Tax planning is not what we`re looking for. And besides, this really is about rigging the game. This really is about the fact that wealth has so, so shifted in this country. That top 1/10 of 1 percent that would be subject to this tax, they now own about the same wealth as 90 percent of America.
And the way that happened is not just they worked harder or they got luckier, it`s that they kept for 30 years now going to Washington saying could you just change the rules just a little bit for us, just give it a little, and they come back the next year and say couldn`t you just, right over here, could you just, and then maybe just a little bit more and a little bit more. Until the wealth just kept flowing in their direction.
A wealth tax stops and acknowledges that, and says you guys scooped up all the wealth and scooped up all the opportunity. You got to put a little bit back in the kitty for everybody else so that their kids get a chance too.
O`DONNELL: Senator Elizabeth Warren, I could go on and on. This is the Senate Finance Committee hearing that I always wanted to have and we never did. Thank you for starting this debate. We`re going to be covering it for quite a while and please come back and join us again. We appreciate it.
WARREN: I will. Thank you so much for having me.
O`DONNELL: Really appreciate it.
Coming up, former CIA Director John Brennan got in a Twitter fight with Donald Trump this weekend in which he called the Trump team your cabal of unprincipled, unethical, dishonest and sycophantic cronies. John Brennan will join us with his reaction to the acting attorney general`s comments today that the Mueller investigation is close to being completed.
And Captain Sully Sullenberger will join us with a description of just how dangerous the shut down was for air travel and what another shut down could do for the safety of air travel in America. The first time that Captain Sully joined this program, it was in the days before last November`s election.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
O`DONNELL: If you could have a moment with the president of the United States, if you could have a minute with him, what would you want to tell him about the way he does his job?
CAPT. SULLY SULLENBERGER: I don`t think he`s either capable or willing to change. I think he is remarkably incurious and doesn`t value learning.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
O`DONNELL: Captain Sully will join us for an exclusive interview coming up.
O`DONNELL: New polling from NBC News confirms that President Trump was the big loser of the Trump shutdown. According to the poll, 50 percent blamed President Trump for the shut down, with 37 percent blaming congressional Democrats, that is presumably the same 37 percent who seem to support President Trump in everything he does and says.
There is a devastating number in that poll for the president especially a president seeking reelection, and that is 63 percent say the country is now off on the wrong track with only 28 percent saying it is heading in the right direction and now with Democratic presidential candidates in official campaign mode against President Donald Trump, the president today decided to threaten possibly another shut down.
Joining our discussion now, John Harwood, editor at large for CNBC, and Jonathan Capehart, opinion writer for the "Washington Post" and an MSNBC contributor.
Jonathan Capehart, I want to start with you. The president -- the country comes out of this horrible shut down after air traffic started to get scary on Friday at LaGuardia airport and elsewhere. Here he is right away saying February 15th when this current funding bill runs out, there could be another one.
JONATHAN CAPEHART, OPINION WRITER, THE WASHINGTON POST: Well, this should not be surprising, I sent out a tweet Saturday or Sunday, probably Saturday saying if you think we`re not going to be in another shut down in three weeks, you know, you got to be kidding. This movie is on a loop. So I wouldn`t be surprised if we are in that situation again. It would require Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to stop being in hiding and to make sure that the president doesn`t do it again.
But again, as we have been talking about for two years, this is a president for whom the normal rules of play, the normal rules of governing are unknown to him. So he very well might want to shut down the government despite the fact, as you opened the show with the fact that what is it, the Congressional Budget Office said $11 billion was lost to the economy as a result of the shut down, but president doesn`t care about that, at all.
O`DONNELL: And Captain Sullenberger is going to be on later in the show talking about not only what the shut down already did and the air traffic system is going to struggle to recover from what already happened but another one is something that is beyond comprehension, and here`s the big reason why it might never happen.
This is "Axios" reporting over the weekend saying that the mood at the Senate Republican lunch on Thursday, day before the shut down ends resembled the mood that must have been on the union lines at 4:00 p.m. at the first bull run, and the message coming out of that lunch to the president was it`s over, there will be 70 votes within 48 hours, meaning there will be 70 votes at least on the Senate floor for that Democrat bill reopening and funding the government. Those 70 votes are still there if Donald Trump tries this again.
JOHN HARWOOD, CNBC EDITOR AT LARGE: And, Lawrence, this is why I disagree with Jonathan. I think Republicans have had their hands on that stove for 35 days. They`ve got third-degree burns, and I do not think they`re going back there. I think what President Trump is trying to do and Mick Mulvaney, and others speaking on his behalf, trying to act tough, we didn`t back down. We might do it again.
I think they`re preparing to take some sort of executive action in the absence of money for this wall whether it`s with DOD funds or in some other mechanism to re-purpose existing funds, I do in the think there`s going to be any stomach in the Republican Party to do it again.
O`DONNELL: Jonathan, the presidential campaign is underway. It`s only days old and we are seeing dynamics that you wouldn`t expect to develop for many, many months, first of all, California`s junior senator announces that she`s running for president. She gets what would have been a record setting crowd at any other time, and so far the record, over 20,000 for this campaign.
We saw crowds like that for Bernie Sanders last time, and then you have Elizabeth Warren who seems to be at this point the policy leader of the campaign. She starts talking about the taxation and it becomes the hot subject, and everybody in the press wants on to that subject. A presidential candidate setting an agenda like that at this stage of the game is something we`re not used to.
CAPEHART: True. But also because there`s such an absence of policy from the White House, there is a void there. You know, she wants to nerd out, and that`s going to be, meaning Senator Warren wants to nerd out, and that`s the field she`s going to play on. There`s a populace that`s out there that`s hungry for ideas.
People complain about Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and how she is on Capitol Hill. But when she went on "60 Minutes", she brought out her own tax plan, and we were talking about a tax plan of a 20 something-year-old. So, now, we`re talking about Senator Warren for whom this is her life`s work, and now she`s running for president, and she`s putting real ideas on the table for all of us to debate, but for all the other candidates to actually respond to.
O`DONNELL: Yes, and John, we know when taxation gets on the table like this, you`re going to see people coming from every direction to attack it. One of the risks in a presidential campaign is putting any kind of tax proposal out there. People try to historically try to avoid it. They would love to get through the campaign without talking about taxes. Here`s where it begins for Democrats.
HARWOOD: That`s right. And I think there`s going to be a lot of policy on the table. You mentioned Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Elizabeth Warren has got tax plan. Kamala Harris has put out a big cut in the earned income tax credit, financed by rolling back the tax cuts.
But I think you put exactly the right question to Elizabeth Warren, and it`s the question for the entire Democratic field, where`s the poetry? Who can capture the poetry? Who can inspire people? It`s one of the things that Beto O`Rourke did in his campaign for the Senate from Texas, unsuccessful, maybe he will run now. But you`re going to have a tremendous amount of Democratic wonkery and pent up desire for Democratic ideas, but who can inspire, who can capture hope, positivity, I think that`s going to be where the advantage lies in this race.
CAPEHART: Well, just, first, before I say what I`m going to say, matter of full disclosure, my husband worked on Senator Harris`s lunch yesterday.
CAPEHART: Anyone watching that speech, though, objectively speaking, that was poetry. That was hope. That was joyful warrior.
HARWOOD: That`s what made it so promising.
CAPEHART: Right, right. And so I do think we`re seeing the poetry. The question is who`s going to follow up that poetry.
O`DONNELL: It`s going to be a great campaign on the Democratic side. It`s going to be one of the most interesting campaign on the Democratic side we have seen in a while.
John Harwood and Jonathan Capehart, thank you both. We appreciate it.
And when we come back, I`ll leave it to you to figure out what Roger Stone meant when he answered a question today about possibly cooperating with Robert Mueller, and there is no doubt about what former CIA Director John Brennan means when he talks about the cabal of unprincipled, unethical, dishonest, and sycophantic cronies who work for Donald Trump. John Brennan joins us next.
O`DONNELL: This weekend, former CIA Director John Brennan tweeted this to President Trump after the president complained about the indictment of his oldest political adviser, Roger Stone. "Your cabal of unprincipled, unethical, dishonest, and sycophantic cronies is being methodically brought to justice. We all know where this trail leads. If your utter incompetence is not enough to run you out of office, your increasingly obvious political corruption surely will."
John Brennan will join us in a moment. Today, acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker said the two most important things he has said publicly since becoming the acting attorney general. Here is the first.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MATTHEW WHITAKER, ACTING ATTORNEY GENERAL: I`ve been fully briefed on the investigation, and, you know, I look forward to Director Mueller delivering the final report.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
O`DONNELL: We did not know that Matthew Whitaker had been fully briefed on the investigation until he said that today. And then he said this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
WHITAKER: Right now, you know, the investigation is, I think, close to being completed. And I hope that we can get the report from Director Mueller as soon as possible.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
O`DONNELL: Close to being completed. There has been plenty of rumor in the news media that the special prosecutor`s investigation is close to being completed but there`s the acting attorney general who has been fully briefed on the investigation saying publicly that it is close to being completed.
Matthew Whitaker`s comments come after Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller`s office had Roger Stone arrested Friday morning and indicted on seven counts, including witness tampering, obstruction of justice and making false statements to Congress.
Robert Mueller has now accused six Trump advisers or associates of lying multiple times to federal officials. Roger Stone is possibly the most attention-craving political operative in history. And so today, he basked in the attention that his arrest and indictment have earned him.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REPORTER: Are you willing to cut a deal with Mueller to avoid getting the case to trial.
ROGER STONE, LONG-TIME TRUMP ASSOCIATE: I don`t answer hypothetical questions. I have no intention of doing so, however.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
O`DONNELL: So what does that mean? He has no intention of cooperating with Robert Mueller. That`s not exactly a vow to never cooperate with Robert Mueller.
Tonight, Congressman Adam Schiff, Chair of the House Intelligence Committee confirmed that former Trump personal lawyer Michael Cohen will testify before his committee in a closed-door hearing on February 8.
And joining us now is John Brennan, former director of the CIA. He`s a senior national security intelligence analyst for MSNBC and NBC News. I want to get, first of all, your reaction since you in the CIA have dealt with analyzing human responses to things, sometimes through surveillance, sometimes through direct interrogation.
What is your reaction to seeing Roger Stone out there today when he`s asked about will you cooperate with Robert Mueller and he, first of all, says he`s not going to answer the question, then he kind of does and says I have no intention of doing it?
JOHN BRENNAN, FORMER DIRECTOR, CIA: well, I think like many in the Trump orbit, he tends to talk in order to distract and continues to deny, deny, deny. And clearly, he`s trying to conceal the truth, but I think the reason why he`s lying is because he knows that he has done things wrong, which is what liars do.
And so, therefore, I think Roger Stone is going to continue to stay on this track, and maybe be hoping that he`s going to be able to get Donald Trump to give him a pardon at some point.
O`DONNELL: Once the shutdown was over, Nancy Pelosi started to get focused on the Roger Stone arrest and therefore the Russia investigation. And she tweeted this weekend, and this is not something Nancy Pelosi does much of, commenting in this area. She said, "What does Putin have on Donald Trump politically, personally or financially?"
Do you think this country`s going to get the answer to all three of those if there is something that Putin has on Donald Trump politically, personally, and financially?
BRENNAN: Well, I certainly hope so. And I believe that Bob Mueller has been masterful in terms of how he has pulled together these indictments. I think we have to think about it as a multi-act play. And I do think we are coming closer to the final act where he is building up to the indictments that are going to be, I think, the most profound, and the ones that are going to try it together.
But if you think of this also as mixing metaphors here but almost three dimensional. One dimension is all the things that Russia has done to try to influence our election. And I think we cannot lose sight of that because we`re going to be having future elections and I`m hoping that Robert Mueller`s report and the indictments are going to give us more insight about what we can do to prevent it.
Secondly, it`s what individuals did to either advance their own interests or advance the interests of Donald Trump. And thirdly, what the campaign as a whole was doing together as part of any type of collusion or even criminal conspiracy. And this is what Robert Mueller, I think, has a responsibility and there`s nobody better to do this to inform the attorney general, the Congress, the American people about what, in fact, people were doing in 2016 to abets Russia`s interests.
O`DONNELL: Do you have a sense of the weight of the Roger Stone indictment? Is this just a nutty guy, which he has been his entire life, a nutty guy who was just behaving crazily and testifying to Congress and so he`s indicted. It really isn`t anything central to Trump world.
BRENNAN: No. I think it`s central but I don`t think we`ve heard the last of what Roger Stone could be indicted for. And I think that indictment was pretty rich in terms of the details there. Doesn`t mean that he couldn`t be indicted for conspiracy, criminal conspiracy.
He was indicted for misleading statements and lying. But I do think that there are other things here that, again, Robert Mueller and his team are pulling together that is going to give us greater insight into just how involved and how deliberate this effort was and the part of individuals who were working very closely with Mr. Trump.
And so I do think that the next series of indictments or indictments that are going to be coming out are going to give us, in fact, those final clues and maybe that final act.
O`DONNELL: Now, you referred to the next series of indictments, why do you believe there will be a next series of indictments?
BRENNAN: Whether it`s one indictment that`s going to include the indictments of many people or it`s going to come out together. But I do think that Robert Mueller is going to try to bring this to some type of closure in the coming months. And I would find it very hard to believe that other indictments are not going to come down, again, based on my reading of all the details in those indictments.
So I think, again, masterful, it was an art and a science in terms of what was included and I think there are a lot of clues there.
O`DONNELL: Is it also based on what you learned before you left the CIA?
BRENNAN: Well, I knew before I left the CIA that Russia was quite actively involved. And that`s why we were trying to prevent that type of interference. And so there are a lot of things that I have learned since I left the government in January of 2017.
And so I put that together with my experience about what the Russians have done, and what was going on in 2016, and I just feel as though there`s a lot more that`s going to be coming out that hopefully will give us as full a picture as possible about what actually happened.
O`DONNELL: John Brennan, thank you very much for joining us.
BRENNAN: Thanks, Lawrence.
O`DONNELL: Really, really appreciate it.
And when we come back, Captain Sully Sullenberger will join us on an exclusive interview on the dangers to air travel caused by the Trump shutdown. And how long it will take for the air travel system to actually recover from the Trump shutdown.
O`DONNELL: On Thursday night, the night before President Trump ended the Trump shutdown, guests on this program discussed the danger that the Trump shutdown represented for the safety of air travel in this country.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SARA NELSON, PRESIDENT, ASSOCIATION OF FLIGHT ATTENDANTS: They are coming to work under the stressful situation because they know very well if they don`t come, the airplanes stay on the ground. And maybe we will avoid casualty by doing that and loss of life, but we are going to have massive catastrophic economic pressure on this country. There will be massive job loss and no one will get away unscathed.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
O`DONNELL: The next morning, LaGuardia Airport in New York City was forced to restrict air traffic and temporarily stop all incoming flights. It was shortly after the announcement of air traffic restrictions that word began to leak from the White House that Donald Trump was going to end the shutdown.
The most famous pilot ever to take off from LaGuardia Airport is Captain Chesley Sullenberger. The day before Donald Trump ended his shutdown, Captain Sully Sullenberger tweeted this, "Like the air traffic controllers and pilots` unions, I`m very concerned about threats to safety caused by the shutdown. Our air traffic controllers deserve to be paid. The traveling public and American people deserve better. This shutdown must end."
Captain Sully Sullenberger knows something about leadership. He knows something about the kind of leadership that can prevent disasters like the Trump shutdown. Captain Sully Sullenberger will join us after this break.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRISH GILBERT, EVP, NATIONAL AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLERS ASSOCIATION: Air traffic controllers` main job is to prevent planes from hitting each other.
GILBERT: That is giving them turns, giving them climbs and descents to miss other planes. They need to be focused on doing that job a hundred percent of the time. They shouldn`t be driving for Uber before their shift. They shouldn`t be waiting tables. They should be getting rested. The fatigue matters. The stress matters.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
O`DONNELL: Joining our discussion now, Captain Sully Sullenberger, the pilot of U.S. Air flight 1549 that landed on the Hudson River safely. He`s also an aviation safety expert. Captain Sullenberger, I know you are a reluctant public commenter and it takes a lot to get you moving.
You tweeted last week, the day before Donald Trump ended the shutdown. We have those aviation experts on Thursday night. And I have to say when I left that show, after hearing Trish Gilbert talk about air traffic controllers trying to prevent the planes from hitting each other.
CHELSEY SULLENBERGER, AVIATION SAFETY EXPERT: Yes.
O`DONNELL: -- and others, I thought, how many more nights of this can President Trump watch? How many more can, politically, can the Republicans endure? So it is my feeling just as a matter of political leverage cause and effect that it is the aviation industry, really, that put the ultimate external pressure to end that shutdown.
SULLENBERGER: Yes. It`s because it`s important to all of us. So many of us fly. You know I`ve been on the other end of the microphone from air traffic controllers for almost 52 years now. Pilots and air traffic controllers work closely together in this carefully choreographed aerial ballet that we have to get right a hundred percent of the time.
So what they do matters. They are the most dedicated, the most professional group you can imagine. And they have a lot of stress already. So adding the stress and the uncertainty of this shutdown to them is just unconscionable.
O`DONNELL: I want to talk to you about leadership and what it means to you and what you see, what the lessons America should take about leadership from this kind of shut down situation. When you`re piloting an aircraft, you are responsible for everyone on that aircraft. You have to make calculations of risk. You have to say this is the risk I`m going to have to accept under these circumstances or I will not accept any risk for whatever reason, we`re not going to take this plane off the ground.
Some information comes your way. There was a massive amount of risk, not just to the flying public but to the public in general, certainly horrible personal risks to government employees, government contractors whose income is cut off for more than a month. I didn`t feel that calculation of risk being made by the people who brought us this shutdown.
SULLENBERGER: Absolutely not. This shutdown was a reckless political act that put millions of Americans at risk unnecessarily. You just have to realize that when we go open an airline, what we`re doing is pushing a tube filled with hundreds of people through the upper atmosphere.
And air traffic controllers have to make sure that they don`t hit each other and they`re separated -- they`re separating vehicles that carry hundreds of people at several hundreds of miles per hour bilaterally a few miles and vertically a thousand feet and there`s no room for distraction. So we also feel like a terrible obligation, an intense obligation to get this right every single time.
That`s also a factor of leadership, and of empathy, of humanity, knowing what`s at stake and caring for the welfare of others. Every captain, air traffic controllers, too, have that responsibility at the forefront of their mind.
When they`re distracted during a shutdown, and they`re worrying about paying their rent and not a hundred percent focused they have to have every single time, then they begin to mistakes that they usually don`t make and they wonder why am I doing that and it`s because of this unnecessary shutdown, this stress test that we`re putting our entire system and our institutions through.
O`DONNELL: How quickly does the aviation system recover from that kind of shutdown?
SULLENBERGER: Not right away. You see, some of these short-term effects also have long-term consequences. Here are just a few examples. The FAA Academy in Oklahoma City is a facility that trains air traffic controllers. During the shutdown, classes were disbanded and will have to be reconstituted. Most air traffic facilities in this country are already understaffed and so they`re not going to get a replacement and new controllers as soon as they need to.
Many controllers are already eligible for retirement. I wonder now if after this disruption and the lack of pay if they`re going to say maybe I should retire now rather than wait. The maintenance that runway has done by just a fourth staff if they weren`t working can`t be done.
O`DONNELL: Maintenance of the air traffic control equipment?
SULLENBERGER: Maintenance of air traffic control equipment during the shutdown was not done. So if air traffic control equipment broke, it was going to stay broken until the shutdown ended and they got to it.
Just one more example is the FA maintenance inspectors who look at airline service difficult reports and find pieces of equipment on airplanes that need to be replaced and if they need to issue a safety alert about it, that work wasn`t being recorded and safety alerts were not being issued.
At every level, this multiple layer safety net that we have is not in place. We have to have that in place to avoid catastrophe.
O`DONNELL: The president is the only player in this story who has already threatened the possibility of another shutdown. No one else involved on any side of it. Even Republican members of Congress are talking that way.
But today, the president said there is a 50-50 chance that he just might do this again if he`s not satisfied with what Congress presents him by February 15. What would you say that another shutdown -- what would you say the damage and risk would be in that?
SULLENBERGER: No leader can afford to be blind to risk. Part of being a leader means that you have a full and accurate appreciation of the risk and you can judge them, what`s reasonable and what`s not. It simply wouldn`t be not only a failure of government but a failure of leadership to do that again.
O`DONNELL: Captain Sullenberger, a real pleasure to have you here. Really an honor to have you on the show.
SULLENBERGER: Thank you, Lawrence.
O`DONNELL: Really appreciate it.
SULLENBERGER: Good to see you again.
O`DONNELL: Tonight`s LAST WORD is next.
O`DONNELL: Tonight`s LAST WORD goes to Steve Martin in his triumphant return to "Saturday Night Live."
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ALEX MOFFAT, PORTRAYING TUCKER CARLSON, SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE: Here with his side of the story is the man you look at and instantly think, I trust this guy. Please welcome Roger Stone.
STEVE MARTIN, PORTRAYING ROGER STONE, SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE: What a fun couple of days. I`m loving the ride. Go, Nixon.
MOFFAT: Thank you for your time, Mr. Stone.
MARTIN: Pardon me?
MOFFAT: I said thank you.
MARTIN: Oh, no, that wasn`t a question. I was saying that to the president. Pardon me.
MOFFAT: Well, I`m sure he appreciates your loyalty and your eccentricities.
MARTIN: I`m just a normal and straightforward guy.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
O`DONNELL: Here`s something I`ve always wanted to say, Steve Martin gets tonight`s LAST WORD.
"THE 11TH HOUR" with Brian Williams starts now.
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED. END