One week after the Trump-inspired siege of the Capitol, Donald J. Trump has become the first president in the history of the United States to be impeached twice. Ten Republicans join every Democrat to impeach President Trump for the second time. GOP members are reportedly afraid for their lives if they vote for impeachment. Mitch McConnell blocks the speedy Trump impeachment trial.
JOY REID, MNBC HOST: That is next Tuesday at 10:00 p.m. And that is tonight's REIDOUT. "ALL IN WITH CHRIS HAYES" starts right now.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CHRIS HAYES, MSNBC HOST (voice over): Tonight on ALL IN.
REP. NANCY PELOSI (D-CA): The President of the United States incited this insurrection; this armed rebellion against our common country. He must go. He is a clear and present danger to the nation that we all love.
HAYES: Seven days from the inauguration, seven days after an insurrection, Donald J. Trump is impeached for the second time.
PELOSI: Today, in a bipartisan way, the House demonstrated that no one is above the law.
HAYES: Tonight, what this means for the country for a Senate trial and for the next president. Then, as 10 Republicans vote to impeach, new calls to investigate the members who supported the mob and new concerns about how the threat of violence affected today's vote.
REP. JASON CROW (D-CO): A couple of them broke down in tears talking to me and saying that they are afraid for their lives if they vote for this impeachment.
HAYES: When ALL IN starts right now.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES (on camera): Good evening from New York. I'm Chris Hayes. One week after the Trump-inspired siege of the Capitol, and the National Guard deployed to defend the seat of American democracy, Donald J. Trump, tonight, has become the first president in the history of the United States to be impeached twice this time for incitement to insurrection for his role in summoning the riot.
It was a surreal scene on the first day of the last week of the presidency of Donald Trump. 10,000 National Guardsmen streamed in to protect the Capitol from the possibility of a second attack. They were of course wearing masks because we are in the midst of a once in a century pandemic with more than 130,000 people hospitalized across the country, and over 4,000 people who died again just today.
And the members of the House representatives also, of course, in masks. Several of their own having tested positive. They returned to the chamber where they had sheltered only feet away from gunshots. They arrived in order to impeach the president for his incitement of that mob and threaten their lives. An impeachment that marks him forever in history as the only president impeached twice.
Without any real defense for the President's action, several Republicans who were basically stepping around sleeping soldiers to make their way to the floor to say the interaction was no big deal, actually tried to blame Democrats for last week's violence.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. MARJORIE TAYLOR GREENE (R-GA): Democrats will take away everyone's guns just as long as they have guards with guns. Democrats' impeachment of President Trump today has now set the standard that they should be removed for their support of violence against the American people.
REP. LAUREN BOEBERT (R-CO): Where's the accountability for the left after encouraging and normalizing violence? Rather than actually helping American people in this time, we start impeachments that further divide our country. I call bullcrap.
REP MATT GAETZ (R-FL): Some incited the metaphor that the President lit the flame. Well, they lit actual flames, actual fires. And we will --
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Time expired. There will be order in the House.
GAETZ: I yield back.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: In the end, 10 Republicans joined with every House Democrat to vote to impeach Donald Trump again.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. GERRY CONNOLLY (D-VA): The American people are asking, is there any depravity too low, is there any outrage too far, is there any blood and violence too much to turn hearts and minds in this body? Instead of the usual justification, rationalization, and enabling in false equivalence we have to hear. This is a moment of truth, my friends. Are you on the side of chaos and the mob on the side of constitutional democracy and our freedom? It's that simple.
REP. JAIME HERRERA BEUTLER (R-WA): My vote to impeach our sitting president is not a fear-based decision. I am not choosing a side. I'm choosing truth. It's the only way to defeat fear.
REP. CEDRIC RICHMOND (D-LA): In the first impeachment, Republicans said we didn't need to impeach him because he learned his lesson, so no need to remove him. Well, we said, if we didn't remove him, he would do it again.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The gentleman's time has expired.
RICHMOND: Simply put, we told you so.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The gentleman's time has expired.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: The next step in this process will be a trial in the Senate as mandated by the cost of tuition. And when that happens, one of the impeachment managers will be Congressman Joe Neguse, Democrat of Colorado, and he joins me now.
What was it like, Congressmen, to be in that chamber today?
REP. JOE NEGUSE (D-CO): Well, Chris, it was a solemn, heavy day for the Congress, solemn heavy day for the country. I will say, you know, as I watched some of the remarks that you just showed, some of my Republican colleagues, what was striking is that they were devoid of any substantive defenses, any cogent arguments to defend the President's conduct.
Everyone knows sitting in that chamber that what the President did last Wednesday was impeachable. There is no question that he committed high crimes and misdemeanors. And the fact that you had multiple Republicans, including the number three Republican in the United States House of Representatives, Liz Cheney, vote in favor of impeachment, ultimately speaks to that.
So, you know, to those who questioned whether or not the Congress would have the resolve whether we would shirk from our constitutional duty, I think the answer tonight was a resounding no. That ultimately, we would stand tall and, and fulfill our constitutional oath to vindicate the constitution and hold this president accountable, which we did. And of course, now we'll proceed to try this case in the United States Senate.
HAYES: There's two ways of looking at those 10 votes on the Republican side. One way is that this is only the fourth impeachment of a president in history and this was by far the most bipartisan vote. They have been routinely quite partisan because impeaching a president tends to break down along party lines.
So, in that sense, historically, this was a historically bipartisan repudiation. In another way, there's 197 Republicans who had to flee to a secure site after the president unleashed a mob on them, that ended up with five people dead, including a police officer bludgeoned to death, who were like -- what do you make of that?
NEGUSE: It's disturbing, Chris. I mean, I think your framing is accurate. Obviously, historically, the fact that this is only the fourth time in the history of the country that the President has been impeached, and as you said, this is certainly the most bipartisan vote of those four historically. The parallels, of course, which you have set on your program, many of us have had said this before to the Andrew Johnson presidency are too glaring to ignore.
So, we should, you know, I think ultimately commended the Republicans who did in fact vote today in favor of impeachment, who chose country over party. But obviously, your latter point is spot on. It is disturbing beyond words that so many Republicans literally after experiencing the armed insurrection that we experienced a week ago -- I was on the floor during the January 6th proceedings. And to think that they would be unwilling to show the courage necessary to uphold their oath and vote in favor of impeachment today, obviously, it's deeply disappointing to me and to so many others.
But look, I think the majority of American people recognize the stakes, they recognize the gravity. They understand why the Congress was compelled to take the solemn step that we did today.
HAYES: What -- as a House impeachment manager, what is your understanding of what the next steps for you and your colleagues are?
NEGUSE: Well, we will prepare to ultimately try this case in the United States Senate. And of course, you know, from having covered the previous trial, not that long ago, the first impeachment of this particular president in January of last year, how that process unfolds. So, myself and my fellow managers, many with whom I serve on the Judiciary Committee, people like Jamie Raskin who is a tremendous lead manager.
I think the speaker made excellent, wonderful choices in the team that she has assembled. All of us have extensive litigation experience or lawyers prior to being elected to the United States Congress. And so will be prepared to try this case and we're hopeful that the Senate will -- the senators, rather, will take an objective, look at the facts that the evidence presented. Ultimately, if they do so, I believe that they will ultimately reach a conviction of this president.
HAYES: Congressman Joe Neguse from the state of Colorado, one of the impeachment managers who was there today on this historic and sad and troubling occasion. Thank you, Congressman.
NEGUSE: Thank you, Chris.
HAYES: I want to bring in Democratic Senator Ed Markey of Massachusetts. Of course, he will now be a juror for the second time in as many years for the President. What is the sentiment that you and your colleagues in the Senate have having watched what happened today?
SEN. ED MARKEY (D-MA): Well, I was very proud of the way in which the House of Representatives conducted the debate and ultimately cast the correct historical vote to impeach Donald Trump. I think that it's the only answer that can be given. History must have recorded that there was a second indelible impeachment, a scarlet letter that was attached to Donald Trump and to his presidency. And I think that the excellent work which they did today sets up now a trial of Donald Trump for his incitement of an insurrection.
HAYES: Yesterday, there was reporting. I think it clearly was leaked from McConnell's office that he was glad that Democrats were impeaching Donald Trump, that he --that he thought maybe Donald Trump deserved it. And we thought, well, maybe we'll see him move swiftly in that direction.
Debbie Stabenow, your colleague, was on this program. She said, watch to see if he calls the Senate back before the 19th. Today, he said, we're not coming back until the 19th, and I haven't made up my mind on impeachment. How do you understand what the next few weeks look like and what that means for the trial?
MARKEY: Well, if Donald -- if Donald Trump is not on trial for the next five days, which I wish he was in order to ensure that we remove him as quickly as possible, his finger is still on the nuclear trigger, he is a completely unstable human being, then we will have to begin when the Democrats are in the majority, right after the inauguration, to begin the trial of Donald J. Trump, President of the United States for a high crime against the United States for clearly endangering our democracy.
HAYES: I've asked this of others, and I've seen reporting on it, so I asked you too. Do you worry about a traffic jam? I mean, I've covered the Senate up close. I never have quite been able to make sense of the intricacies of the legislative calendar in the Senate. It makes no human sense. There's lots of stuff that like, you know, you got to do this for seven hours before you come back, yadda, yadda, yadda, yadda.
Do you worry that that the impeachment trial and the agenda of a new democratic president and a democratic majority will be intention?
MARKEY: I don't think it's a choice that we can make. I think we have to do both. Clearly, last Wednesday, we were within minutes, not 10 minutes, not five minutes, a couple of minutes of having this mob in many of the -- as the evidence is unspooling, indicates that this could have been a plot. There could have been a well-organized effort.
They came with weapons. They came with the types of devices that could have resulted in a mass hostage-taking of House and Senate members that could have resulted in a massacre. And we were just a couple of minutes from that situation unfolding potentially. So, we don't have a choice. We have to have a trial.
And then at the same time, we have to begin the work of confirming Joe Biden's cabinet officials of putting his new bold agenda for the country on the docket of the United States Senate. And we'll have to manage the time to make sure we're doing all of it. But accountability has to be a part of the agenda in the same way that the confirmation process and the substantive agenda of dealing with the COVID crisis, a $2,000 check for all Americans, ensuring that we begin the process of rooting out the racial injustice, which is built into every part of our American society. We have to do it all. We don't have a choice.
HAYES: Senator Ed Markey of Massachusetts who will soon be in the majority and soon be sitting in a jury trying the President again. Thank you very much.
MARKEY: Thank you.
HAYES: Turning now to Matt Fuller of HuffPost who covered today's historic second impeachment of Donald Trump. Michelle Goldberg, op-ed columnist for the New York Times. And Matt, I'll start with you. First of all, it's the first time everyone's back in the gallery since the sixth and I'm just curious what that felt like.
MATT FULLER, CONGRESSIONAL REPORTER, HUFFPOST: Yes, well, I mean, there was some of us who were there last night for the 25th Amendment vote. But it's surreal. I was sitting in the same exact seat that I was a week ago, watching a lot of the same sort of fights happening that we're having a week ago. This now is just after an extraordinary moment.
And obviously, you know, as you said at the top of the shows, National Guard crawling around, members of Congress waiting their way through service members. And obviously the -- you know, the Capitol right now is sort of a military complex. So, it's a little surreal. Certainly, it takes a lot longer to get through to the Capitol. But I think everyone sort of understands the it's an unprecedented situation we're in.
HAYES: Michelle, I have to say that I work hard to stop feeling despair, to not -- to not be tempted by despair. But there's something hard for me to swallow to see only 10 Republican votes. It's not surprising in historic terms. It is a historic bipartisan repudiation. But he sent a mob after them who would have probably killed a lot of them or taking them hostage or killed their colleagues. There's a cop who was bludgeoned to death. There's five people dead and they got 10 votes.
MICHELLE GOLDBERG, OP-ED COLUMNIST, NEW YORK TIMES: Well, look, I don't think that there's any limit to the despair that somebody should feel about the Republican Party. But you know, speaking as a person who's quite given to despair myself, I think there's something very encouraging about the fact that we finally reached this moment.
This moment when I thought we would be here much earlier, but we're here where there is a broad societal rejection of Donald Trump, at least at the elite level, right, where you have this kind of corporate mobilization against Trump. You have his law firm dumping him. You have everyone who can possibly distance himself from this person. People who have they taken these steps years ago, you know, had major corporations said years ago, that they were not going to donate to members of Congress who enabled Donald Trump. Think of all of the suffering and misery that could have been avoided.
Nevertheless, I don't a week ago, I don't think that people thought that Donald Trump was going to be leaving the presidency with the shame and ignominy and disgrace that is now that he is now heaped upon himself. And so, at least, you know, I think that we now know how Donald Trump is going to be remembered and also received once he's back in the outside world.
HAYES: Yes. I think that's true. And I wonder, Matt, what your reporting suggests about those calculations within the Republican caucus and what that -- were you surprised by that number? Was that what you thought it would be?
FULLER: Yes. I started the day off with an over-under of nine and they came at it. You know, they got one more. I would say that, you know, there was one congressman who had one thing to say that I thought was kind of, I guess, illuminating. It was Kelly Armstrong of North Dakota who said, you know, on my side, we're going to win points by voting no on this, and your side, we're going to win -- you're going to win points for voting yes.
And that kind of struck me because I don't think that's how those 10 Republicans really viewed it. I think a lot of those 10 Republicans actually see that it's damaging for them, particularly for Liz Cheney. I think she might be actually be in trouble as the number three House Republican. She might be removed as the conference chairwoman.
There's obviously some political gain. I think John Katko is in a very difficult district. Jaime Herrera Beutler has in a somewhat difficult district and there's not really a primary issue for her because of how Washington's primary work, the same with Dan Newhouse. But I think that, you know, for Republicans, it really was just a, you know, grin and bear it, same partisan thing that they've been doing for four years or even longer than that.
And, you know, I just don't -- I don't know what to make of it more than that they just really just saw this as just another partisan vote. And a few of them sort of the message kind of got through them but by and large, it didn't.
HAYES: Yes. And I think, Michelle, one of the things that I think as you describe the sort of widespread repudiation ignominy the president now rightly faces, and particularly those members that voted to overturn the election, I do think the sort of dawning awareness that like this was an attempt to essentially end the version of American democracy that we have come to know and think of. Like, to install the loser over the winner. That is -- that that was what this was an attempt at multiple levels from the president, to the members of Congress, to the mob, that it is dawning in just how serious that is, I think.
GOLDBERG: I think it is, too. And it's-- you know, again, it's tragic that it took this long for that to dawn because Donald Trump has not ever -- has never made any secret of his intention. He's never made any secret of his contempt for democracy. He's never made any secret of inciting violence. This isn't even the first time that he encouraged an armed mob to storm a capitol building, right. I mean, that happened in Michigan.
So -- but -- and yet, you know, there's something kind of categorically different when you see the Capitol building of the United States, this sacred space, this place that, you know, Democrats and Republicans alike have this real romantic attachment to be so desecrated, so defiled. And as senator Markey said, when you realize just how close we came to something infinitely worse than even the kind of extraordinary violence that we all already saw.
HAYES: Final question for you, Matt. You know, one thing that is shocking to me, and this was before a deadly and armed insurrection against the U.S. Capitol was after the election, you saw a lot of Democrats, liberals, progressives, leftist, socialist across the spectrum engaging in fights and recriminations about the election. What do we have to do? What should we do?
There's essentially none of it on the Republican side as far as I can tell. Like, there's no active conversation debate about like, well, we just -- our President got turfed out for one term. That didn't happen. He never was over 50 percent. We just lost the Senate. Am I missing it? Are those conversations happening or is it just like, soldier on?
FULLER: No, I mean, I think you're right. Democrats do a lot of the handwriting that -- I'm sorry. Yes, Democrats do a lot of hand wringing and Republicans never do. As you just said, you know, they just lost The White House. They don't have control of the House as much as they've been patting themselves on the back for picking up seats, and they just lost the Senate, right.
So, in the democratic world, and like the alternate universe of that, Democrats would be kicking themselves and figuring out how they can change and appeal more to, you know, diner voters or whatever. And Republicans are just sort of pushing ahead and it's Trump again.
I had someone tell me basically tonight that, you know, in six months, Donald Trump will once again be the, you know, the platform of the party. He's the heart and soul of the Republican Party. And despite this insurrection (AUDIO GAP) change.
HAYES: Yes. Well, very patriotic sentiment. Matt Fuller and Michelle Goldberg, thank you both.
GOLDBERG: Thank you.
HAYES: Ahead, from the mob that attacked the Capitol, to the language of some Republicans on the floor today. Look at the way I t-- violence, political violence, and the threat of it has now infiltrated and undermined American democracy.
HAYES: When the President directed the mob to go to the Capitol last week as lawmakers are voting on certifying the presidential election, right, counting the votes actually. The idea was to use that mob to intimidate members of Congress into overturning the election and to become complicit with Trump's plot to do so.
Well, today, members of Congress walked by sleeping National Guardsmen in the Capitol on their way to vote on impeachment. They passed through metal detectors to reach the House Chamber that were put in because of fears of security. And as you take in these images and the images from last week, something becomes clear, that a kind of specter that has haunted our politics for at least the past four or five years has now materialized in the flesh in front of us clear for all to see, political violence and its effects.
It is clear that a significant part of the political calculations of this Trump era, particularly for Republicans, has been the threat of violence and the fear of it. One week ago, a violent mob stormed the Capitol. They erected a noose on the grounds, a gallows that appeared to be functional. And they chanted hang Mike Pence as they searched actively for lawmakers who dare to defy Trump. Some of them, apparently, with some real knowledge of the Capitol.
Republican Congressman Peter Meyer of Michigan, just elected, he's just serving now, said he had GOP colleagues who knew they should certify Joe Biden's legitimates victory, right, vote to seek the electors, but they did not do so because of -- and I quote him here, "legitimate concerns about the safety of their families." They felt that that vote would put their families in danger.
Think about that for a second. If they voted to ratify the election, their families would be in danger. On this very show last night, Olivia Troy told me that the vice president who, of course, has been unfailingly loyal to the President -- that's I think the most charitable and graceful way to describe it -- had to consider the threats to him and his family, as he was making calculations about whether to further the President's coup, right? If I don't further the President's coup, well, then someone might try to hurt me or my family.
And that calculation probably really hit home as Pence was sheltering in a secure location, while a mob that wanted to hang him was rampaging through the Capitol and while the President was attacking him for not having the courage to overturn the election. And then today, Congressman Jason Crow said that some of his Republican colleagues were worried that they would be killed if they voted to impeach the president for inciting the violent riot.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CROW: But the majority of them are actually paralyzed with fear. And I had a lot of conversations with my Republican colleagues last night, and a couple of them broke down in tears talking to me and saying that they are afraid for their lives if they vote for this impeachment.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: Now, multiple reporters rush to confirm the exact same thing. These are people sourced in these roles and say, yes, I've heard the same thing. Personal safety is clearly an issue. Not just that, a bunch of the President's supporters also made the argument that Trump should not be impeached because of further violence. The violent mob would come back to extract further event.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We see what's happening around this country. Our 50 state houses are being threatened on Inauguration Day. This is the last thing you want to do.
REP. ANDY BIGGS (R-AZ): I urge you please do not -- and then mixing metaphors here -- attempt to douse the remaining burning embers of this movement with gasoline.
REP. LOUIE GOHMERT (R-TX): But the Democrats taking this action, you're telling me, no, when we say those, we actually mean to incite violence. That's what this action is saying.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: You're inciting violence because you're punishing the violent mob incited by the President. And if you do that, well, then that -- you get -- you know, it happens, right? Don't anger the mob by punishing its leader or else -- and I want to be clear here. When you hear some Republicans are too scared to do the right thing, I think some of it's pretty self-serving, right? Some of it is an excuse for not doing the right thing. They know what the right thing is. They don't want to do it.
But it's not crazy. I mean, it is the case. And I can tell you this. This is true. When a person is targeted by the President, when you're targeted by the President on Twitter, your security situation becomes immediately serious. It's true for lawmakers from Mike Pence to Ilhan Omar. It's true for people in the media. It is true for anyone that Trump singled out for criticism.
I mean, Dr. Anthony Fauci has worked in this government for five decades. And he used to be the kind of person who would walk down the street and not need a bodyguard. Those days are gone. Now, he and his family, they need security amid a wave of death threats. And that's because the same people that are pumped full of Facebook conspiracies and Fox News and the President's lies hate Anthony Fauci, and some small number of them want to do him harm.
A functioning civil society is one that resolves pollution legal disputes through legal and democratic process and through protests and civil society. It does not resolve them because one side is worried the other side will shoot it dead if they don't do what they want. And that is a reality, the menace, the intolerable ingredient that Donald Trump has helped add to politics in this era. And it threatens the very core of liberal democracy itself.
One of the congressional representatives risking her own political future to stop this existential threat the country joins me next.
HAYES: Members of Congress we're back in the chamber today one week after that horrible attack on the Capitol where members had to shelter and go to secure locations. Today, they were there with metal detectors that have been placed on the entrance of the House floor which has infuriated many Republicans who think it's an insult that maybe their other colleagues don't want them carrying on the floor.
And one of the members of Congress who voted to impeach Donald Trump for the second time is democrat Elissa Slotkin of Michigan and she joins me now. Congresswoman, I want to sort of start with this -- talking about the people saying things out loud that I think have been hanging over the Congress, this idea that worries about personal safety, worries about what it means if you get out -- you get crosswise of the President. Like, how much do you think that's a palpable thing that hangs over the body you do your work in?
REP. ELISSA SLOTKIN (D-MI): Oh, I think, frankly, a lot of the Republicans that I've been talking to in the past week have sort of become awakened to what it's been like for a lot of us for a really long time. I mean, certainly, as you said, if the president deems to tweet about you, or your race, certainly that was something that made us less safe in the past.
But this idea that somehow, you know, the base was threatening people this week and making choices for these members of Congress, that's something that a lot of us have experienced for a long time. And, frankly, that's been some of the harder conversations that I've had with my Republican peers. You know, they'll lament to me how tough it's become. And I've said to some of them, like, that's like a Wednesday for some of us.
And it's hard, because we feel like we haven't been heard by them for a long time. And I don't want anyone to feel threatened. We don't want that in our politics. As you said, it's horrible for anyone. But it does feel like now that it's turning on them, they're sort of upset about it. And for many of us, we've been living like that for a while.
HAYES: I just want to be more specific here. When you say on these conversations, that's a Wednesday for us. What's the that? What are -- what are they experiencing now?
SLOTKIN: Sure. So, I had a member say to me, Elissa, you don't understand. I'm getting 150 calls a day. People are so angry with me. They are threatening me. They are threatening my staff. They're threatening my family. There are militias forming in my district. People I know are becoming violent and going underground.
And, you know, I'm from mid-Michigan. We've had a lot of problems of those same things for a long time now. So, it's that feeling of personal stress that I think that they just have sort of served on this wave of populism to their benefit for a while now. And when the curl of the wave turns over them, it's distressing and they're feeling it.
HAYES: I wonder if that's -- I mean, I think it's true. And I it's good to hear -- have this conversation, because it's humanizing. Like, it is important to remember that it's human beings that work in that capital, it's human beings that are elected as representatives, it's human beings that, you know, showed up at the rally, right? It's all people.
But I think that I thought that that would register more. Like, the thing you're describing to me of feeling like, we have unleashed something truly bad and dangerous, which I think you would think would be the realization. Like, it just doesn't appear to me that has necessarily sunk in. Or maybe it has, and they're just -- their voting behavior doesn't show it.
SLOTKIN: No. And I want to be -- I want to be frank here that I don't think many of them see their connection to this kind of anger and violence in our system. And again, these have been very hard times. And I really applaud my colleagues who voted for impeachment today. And I applaud the others who have still kept those channels of communication open with us, Democrats. We've had some very difficult conversations over the past, you know, week.
But it is hard for me to disconnect from people who have supported what the President's done for a very long time, and they -- there still isn't that connection for many of my peers.
HAYES: You know, one last question for you. And you're in a swing district and you're in a state that's very contested political terrain in many ways. You know, one thing that strikes me the president released a statement tonight that, you know, was one of those statements that it reads off teleprompter and doesn't sound at all like him. He explicitly called for no violence, which is good. Better than the opposite. But one thing that's -- to draw the poison out is for the -- you know, for the Jim Jordans and the Matt Gaetzs and the Donald Trumps of the world to say, Joe Biden won the election. He won it fair and square. It was a free and fair election. He got more votes. He is the duly elected president. There was -- like, no one -- that would help, wouldn't it?
SLOTKIN: Yes. I think -- I mean, I guess just because I'm a former CIA officer and a Pentagon official, like, leadership climate is set at the top. And I think if you heard that really strong, clear message, and you had that echoed through all the senior leadership, it indeed would matter.
And there'd still be those sort of like bitter renders who feel like, no, no, no, we've got to keep going. But for the vast majority of people, it would have an effect and he's choosing not to use that voice. And that's--it's not uncharacteristic for the last four years but it's so painful because this door has been opened on the use of violence in our politics. And I refuse to believe that that's how we're going to have to exist now especially from swing district.
So, he's not using his voice, he hasn't used his voice. Other elected leaders are starting to use their voice, and hopefully that's a start.
HAYES: Congresswoman Elissa Slotkin who is from Michigan, in the Capitol today for that impeachment vote, voted to impeach the president, thank you so much for making time.
SLOTKIN: Thank you.
HAYES: Still to come, multiple House Democrats now raising questions about whether some of their Republican colleagues were actively collaborating with the mob. The new allegations next.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. JERRY NADLER (D-NY): Madam Speaker, I have faith in the resiliency of our government. We will bring the rioters to justice. Their accomplices in this house will be held responsible.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: Pretty heavy statement there from Congressman Jerry Nadler, referring to some of his Republican colleagues as "accomplices in the crimes committed in the attack on the Capitol last week. But here's the thing. Several Democrats have now gone on the record saying that they suspect some of their colleagues were more than just sympathetic to the aims of the mob, and may have been active collaborators.
Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez did an Instagram live video last night that she did not feel safe taking shelter during the attack with some Republican House members because she was concerned they might disclose her location to the rioters who may have wanted to harm her.
Today, Mikie Sherrill, Democrat from New Jersey, she's in a sort of swing district, she wrote a letter to the acting Sergeant at Arms and Capitol Police requesting an investigation into suspicious behavior and access given to visitors to the complex -- Capitol Complex on Tuesday, the day before the attacks. And in a video last night, she referred to those tours as possible reconnaissance.
These serious allegations add to the patches of knowledge and loads of unanswered questions we still have about just how in cahoots members of Congress word with a mob. Tim Alberta is covering this story closely as chief political correspondent for Politico and he joins me now.
I got to say, Tim, you know, in traumatic and violent and chaotic events, there's sometimes this rush to sort of impose order, and you hear people sort of flow theories. And so, I'm very careful about like, what we know and what we don't know. But what is clear to me now is that there are Democratic members who genuinely suspect that their colleagues were collaborating in some active logistical way, with some members of the mob who invaded the Capitol. Do you think that's a fair assessment?
TIM ALBERTA, CHIEF POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT, POLITICO: Yes, Chris, I do. And I'm with you. I think we have to be super careful about this. And look, you know, my colleague, John Harris wrote the other day at Politico that we need a 9/11 commission-style investigate into what's happened here over the past -- not just over the past week, but really over the past nine weeks. And I agree with him wholeheartedly.
But to your specific question, yes, in my conversations, privately, off the record, with some House Democrats, as well as what we've heard publicly over the last 48 hours, it's plainly apparent that there are real credible suspicions that these people have that there was in some way coordination happening in the house, inside the Capitol in the days leading up to January 6th. And if so, if that's proven, I can't think of a bigger story in modern congressional history.
HAYES: We know that there were -- there were folks -- Mo Brooks addressed that, you know, the group in the ellipsis, right, with President. We know that some, you know, actively supported the protests, if you want to call them that, which I think we're in pursuit of a fundamentally irredeemable project to overturn the election.
Paul Gosar ghosts are tweeting this on January 6th. "Biden should concede. I want his concession on my desk tomorrow morning. Don't make me come over there." A picture of the crowd, stop the steal '21, and then tagging in one of the organizers, @Ali, who is an organizer, but also I think there's some credible evidence may have been involved in more than organizing a rally and may have been much more implicated in the actual movements that happen afterwards.
ALBERTA: Yes. So, Chris, this is where it gets a little bit dicey, and again, where we have to be careful, right? Because there's a substantial difference between getting up at a rally and giving a speech, even if that speech is, as you said, in pursuit of the illegal and the unconstitutional and the unethical.
Ultimately, giving a speech to a crowd and getting some people worked up is still going to be substantially different than if you are actually -- you and your staff, if you are bringing people inside the Capitol and helping them conduct, in the words of Mikie Sherrill, reconnaissance on the U.S. Capitol building, a secure federal building that houses you know, thousands of staff and hundreds of federal lawmakers, including people in the presidential line of succession. You cannot do that, obviously.
And if an investigation bears out that there were people involved in that, Chris, again, I'm not, you know, a legal expert here. I only play one on late-night T.V., but I don't think that that would bring significant federal charges given what we saw last Wednesday.
HAYES: Yes. And just to return to where you started. I mean, this -- what's maddening about this is, at some level, we all saw it live, right. But one of the things that we've learned is we didn't see it live. There was a lot happening that we didn't see. There's information coming out in dribs and drabs there. There was one briefing yesterday that was fairly brief and not by the people that work the heart of it.
And to your point, it's like there has to be to be something more comprehensive, some transparent recitation of what facts have been established because this is madness right now picking through footage and the -- you know, what people say happen.
ALBERTA: Well, look, man, this is going to be a -- we know that there are blessings and curses of the mass technology era. But this is going to be one of the blessings is that I feel like what we've seen come out in the last seven days is just a sliver of what the evidence ultimately that the Feds are going to be able to gather in trying to piece together (AUDIO GAP), right.
And so, it's frustrating, you're right, in the moment. But I do have a feeling that ultimately they're going to be able to build that comprehensive case we're talking about.
HAYES: Yes, it's a very good point. I think the truth here is knowable. It's a question of under what conditions and when we know it. Tim, Alberta, always a pleasure. Thank you.
Still to come, Donald Trump has been impeached again. Now, the big question is will the Senate convict. Everything you need to know about the looming impeachment trial, what it means for the Biden agenda, with a Senate expert after this.
HAYES: Now that Donald Trump has become the very first president in the history of this great nation to have been impeached twice, charged this time with inciting violence against the governor in the United States, the question becomes, what will the Senate do?
Right now, the majority leader, that's Mitch McConnell, though he won't be for long, says they won't reconvene until January 19th, which means an impeachment trial won't happen until Trump's last full day in office at the earliest.
Someone who knows the Senate inside is out is Adam Jentleson, former deputy chief of staff to Senate Leader Harry Reid. He's author of the fantastic new book Kill Switch: The Rise of the Modern Senate, which just got way, way more relevant, even though I read it before the recent events, and it's great. You should definitely check it. And he joins me now.
All right, here's how we start, Adam. Chuck Schumer calls you up and he -- and he hires you to be his field general for the next month, OK. You work for Harry Reid, you just written a book about the Senate. Like, what would be your optimal plan about how to approach this given that it's like genuinely a difficult undertaking that he has in front of him?
ADAM JENTLESON, FORMER DEPUTY CHIEF OF STAFF TO SENATOR HARRY REID: It is a difficult undertaking. And I think what he has to balance is the need to move forward with President Biden's agenda, the need to confirm his nominees on a timely basis, and the need to conduct this trial for this, you know, incredible -- incredibly disturbing series of events that we've seen transpire over the last week. So, I would try to do it quickly.
This is a case where, you know, as you discussed in the last segment there, there's probably more disturbing evidence (AUDIO GAP). We know why we -- Trump is being impeached. There's no question that Trump incited violence here. And the House passed one article of impeachment, so the Senate trial can be relatively straightforward and very focused on that article.
So, I would say, you know, keep it simple in a way. We just need to bring this question to a head as quickly as possible. And we need to put Republicans on the record. You know, Republicans have flirted with this idea of breaking with Trump many, many times. It is really time for them to put up or shut up now. And I think you want to bring that question and force them to answer it as quickly as you possibly can.
HAYES: So, I guess this is maybe an overly technical question, but I'll ask it anyway. Like, there's some talk about dividing the day that -- you know, it's like in the morning, we do the trial, in the afternoon, we do the, you know, the other stuff. How workable is all that stuff?
JENTLESON: It's complicated because on the one hand, the Senate is the master of its own destiny. The Senate can decide to go in and out of session. It can decide Tuesday as Wednesday. You know, it could be lots of things if every member of the Senate decides they want to do it together. If you have a divided Senate, it's much harder to set up those kind of flexible procedures.
I think it's probably possible to do some sort of bifurcated strategy here. But it's going to be complicated and will pose a big challenge for Majority Leader Schumer. But it's yet another reason that I think you want to keep this short. There's not a lot to see here beyond what we already know. The events will continue to come to light. But the fundamental question is whether the Senate should convict Donald Trump for something he clearly did. And I think that question can be brought and forced and put in front of Republican senators relatively quickly.
HAYES: How much -- how much control will the minority have over the terms of the trial itself? Like, if they think -- if Mitch McConnell thinks -- I mean, and I think he probably thinks this. Like, actually, maybe this can be a gift. I could burn up a lot of clock that they want to use to confirm nominees. You know, OK, maybe you get someone to DOJ, but you don't get -- you don't get someone underneath the A.G. right? How much control will the minority have of the sort of contours in the process?
JENTLESON: Not a lot. I mean, this is a process that is pretty prescribed and it's relatively straightforward. You hear the two sides, and then the Senate conducts a trial and, you know, delivers the verdict of the jury. So, you know, McConnell can try to use this to drag things out, but he's going to be somewhat limited in his potential to do that.
I also think that it will be easy to call him out for trying to do that. And so, I think, you know -- but yet again, to come back to the point. I think that this is yet another reason not to take forever with this process. We know what Trump did. He did it in broad daylight, so let's just, you know, let's hold the trial. Let's bring the question up and force Republicans to take a position on the record.
HAYES: All right, next time, I want to have you back to talk about your book, but also talk about how that relates to the sort of substantive agenda here where a lot of news happening about what the first bill is going to be in that Senate. Really some encouraging stuff, some really important stuff. Adam Jentleson, thanks for making time tonight.
JENTLESON: Thanks, Chris.
HAYES: That is ALL IN this evening. "THE RACHEL MADDOW SHOW" starts right now. Good evening, Rachel.
RACHEL MADDOW, MSNBC HOST: Good evening, Chris. Thanks, my friend.
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.END
Content and programming copyright 2021 MSNBC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2021 ASC Services II Media, LLC. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of ASC Services II Media, LLC. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.