Skip to main content

tv   The Last Word With Lawrence O Donnell  MSNBC  September 8, 2015 7:00pm-8:01pm PDT

7:00 pm
joint terrorism task force now say the clinic burned down because of arson. they do not have anybody in custody. they are investigating. because of the history of domestic terrorists, targeting abortion providers it is not just a local police investigation, but it will be the fbi and atf, as well. pullman, washington. but also washington, d.c. watch this space. that does it for us tonight. we a see you tomorrow. now it is time for "the last word with lawrence o'donnell." >> tonight from boston where tom brady was asked that question that all you patriots fans want to know, is he going to vote for donald trump? >> that hat in his locker is ironic. i'm quite sure it is ironic. >> the answer is coming up in this broadcast. >> very good. thank you, lawrence. >> thank you, rachel. donald trump goes to washington tomorrow to lead a rally against the iran deal. it's already too late for that.
7:01 pm
tonight, my first guess secretary of energy ernest moniz will answer the criticisms of the deal made by dick cheney today. >> major victory for president obama and the white house on the iran nuclear deal. >> this agreement will stand. >> they went over the top of the senate. >> and made sure president obama doesn't need his veto pack. >> we have not getting anything out this deal. >> chick cheney ramped up his criticism. >> it will give iran the means to launch a nuclear attack on the u.s. homeland. breaking news out of kentucky where county clerk kim davis was released from jail. mike huckabee turning out in support of kim davis. >> if you have to put someone in jail, i volunteer to go. let me go. >> he is a good candidate.
7:02 pm
>> chance of run, joe, run are picking up steam. >> he looks like a candidate shaking hands, smiling, kissing babies. >> will joe biden jump in? >> i have to talk to my wife about that. >> final five undecided senators announce their positions today on the obama administration's deal with iran. republican susan collins of maine announced he will oppose the deal. four democrats announced they will support it. richard blumenthal, gary peter and widen announced their support. the final from maria cantwell this afternoon. in a speech, harry reid declared victory for president obama. >> today i'm gratified to say to my fellow americans our negotiating partner and allies around the world, this agreement will stand. america will uphold its commitment and we will seize this opportunity to stop iran from getting a nuclear weapon.
7:03 pm
>> tomorrow, republican presidential candidates donald trump and ted cruz will participate in a previously scheduled rally in washington to "stop the iran deal. it is clearly too late to do that. on "meet the press" on sunday, general colin powell announced his support for the iran deal. >> i think a vigorous verification regime has been put in place. the iaea and other organizations and especially listening to secretary of energy moniz. he knows this stuff. he's a nuclear physicist and he and the intelligence community are confident they can verify what is happening inside of iran. >> joining us now is energy secretary ernest moniz, also professor of physics emeritus at m.i.t. when you hear former secretary of state colin powell and others citing you and he's not the first to do it but citing you
7:04 pm
and your expertise as one of the key elements they are relying on in supporting the decision, do you find it in conversations with people like that and one on ones with senators that there is a point that you need to get them over, one hurdle that usually closes the deal? >> well, first of all, i think lawrence, the important part is the deal is very much founded on science. we feel the more we have a chance to explain what the deal has, it is pretty complex. that we are gratified frankly that senior people like general powell and many others are supporting the deal. i think in response to the key point is that the construct of the deal is fundamentally that for 15 years we rolled back substantially the iranian program. but we put in place verification measures that really go on forever with very special and
7:05 pm
unique ones that go for 25 years. in fact, as you heard, general powell really focused in on verification, which is critical to guaranteeing that iran never has a nuclear weapon. >> another former bush administration official has a completely different view. that's former vice president dick cheney. let's listen to what he said today about the 24 days in this deal. >> president obama has accepted a deal that gives the iranians anywhere from 24 days to many months to delay inspections at suspicious sites. inspections of military sites where the iranians have concealed suspect elements of their nuclear weapons program in the past are not covered by this agreement. the american people have been told not to concern themselves with this. >> your response to that, mr. secretary? >> i think there are many problems with that statement to be perfectly honest. first of all, with regard to the
7:06 pm
24 days, we should understand at the major nuclear facilities there will be daily inspections available to the international inspectors. now for undeclared, suspicious sites, the 24 days, first of all, is the first time that there's ban fixed time period where the country must respond. up until now, frankly, they can drag it out indefinitely. as in fact iran has done in the past. now, instead, they get 14 days to work it out with the country. if they don't work it out with iran in this case, there is a ten-day process in which access must be supplied. the next question is, that's great. now we have for the first time a required response period. but is that period too long? no. we made it very, very clear that the kind of covert work with nuclear materials that would be essential in the weapons program we are extremely confident we
7:07 pm
would detect after 24 days. in fact, it may be conveniently forgotten by some that over ten years ago iran delayed an inspection for six months. tried to clean up and the uranium used was still detected. we have a lot of confidence in our ability here. it certainly raises bar on iranian cheating dramatically which of course in itself will be a major deterrent to that kind of cheating. this is a very, very strong, very, very strong agreement. i want to emphasize it is unique to have this kind of fixed time period for access to a site where we think they may be doing something out of bounds. >> let's listen to what the chairman of the foreign relations committee said today about what reason would iran have for continuing as much of
7:08 pm
their nuclear program as they want to? what application does it have in medical science or anywhere else? let's listen to this? >> some have said, well f they want to pursue the technology of medical isotopes, maybe, maybe they could use 500 centrifuges, but instead they put their entire society through grinding sanctions that have harmed families. they have been doing that for years. for something that they have no practical need for. there's only one need, and we all know that, and that is because they want to be in a position to be a nuclear armed country. >> your response to that, mr. secretary? >> first of all, i'm not going to present all of iran's arguments or judgment on them. the key argument they use is that they intend to have a nuclear program with ten,
7:09 pm
perhaps more, nuclear power reactors with the motivation that their hydro carbons, their oil and gas, have more value in industrial uses or in the export market. that's least the rationale they put forward. again, i'm not judging on the wisdom of that. >> secretary moniz, is that the rationale the u.s. team accepted? you have to have a rationale for this being in the deal. >> our rationale -- first of all, one should remember the nonproliferation treaty permits and in some ways encourages the development of peaceful nuclear power programs. in this deal our job was simple. they have a program. we rolled back that program. we guaranteed an extension of
7:10 pm
the breakout time from two to three months to at least a year and put in place extraordinary verification measures. so this is a deal built for the long term. iran will have to comply and build confidence in the international community that it is a peaceful program. but we will have a strong verification regime essentially forever. >> secretary ernest moniz, thank you for joining us tonight. >> thank you, lawrence. >> joining us now form er senate majority leader -- mitchell, special envoy for middle east peace. senator mitchell, i want to get your reaction to the chairman of the foreign relations committee said today on the senate floor. he said one of his many problems with this deal, i'm trying to quote him exactly but he said it shifts the leverage to iran. that going forward iran will
7:11 pm
have the leverage because the sanctions will be gone and our side will not have any leverage. >> i think it is just the opposite. remember, iran did not enter these negotiations seeking a 98% reduction in their stockpile of enriched uranium. they did not enter the negotiations seeking an end to the program at the heavy water reactor which could produce plutonium. they did not enter seeking a two-thirds reduction in their reactors. what they entered negotiations for was once pril principal reason, an immediate end to sanctions. said many times that iran must have an immediate end to sanctions as soon as the agreement is signed. they did not get that. the sanctions will be raised or lifted only after iran verifiably takes all of the steps required in the agreement.
7:12 pm
as the secretary pointed out, it has a substantial verification process that will extend over a very long period of time, in particular not much mention publicly, a dedicated procurement process which will give inspectors the opportunity to carefully evaluate everything that iran is doing when combined with the inspections. so, it isn't perfect. nothing is in life, and particularly an agreement reached by adversaries after a very lengthy negotiations, but the reality is, the leverage rests entirely with the united states and the allies. lawrence, you didn't ask this, but if i can make a further point. that is if iran does cheat and we must be vigilant knowing they have not told the truth in the past about their program, the united states will be in a vastly stronger position to rally international support or
7:13 pm
whatever action is necessary to prevent them from getting a nuclear weapon including military force. because we were in this negotiation and on our side of the table in the agreement. it's not just the u.s. it is russia, china, briten, france and germany. the agreement is supported by every country who has a membership on the u.n. security council and the vast majority of the world that have declared a position support the agreement. so if we went were now to back out of the agreement. if the congress, those opponents in congress would have prevailed we would have been in a position of low credibity. unable to marshall any support ifny action were needed in the future. now with the agreement going forward, whoever the president is will be in a strong position, if iran cheats. >> let's listen to something that former vice president cheney said today. i think it summarizes a bunch of criticisms we are hearing, especially from republicans on
7:14 pm
this. let's listen to this. >> under president obama's agreement, there will be no anywhere, anytime inspections and no inspections of military sites. there will be no access to the regime's nuclear scientists, no full disclosure of past activity, no full access to documents pertaining to iran's nuclear program and iran will be doing some inspections themselves. we are essentially leaving it up to iran to let us know when and went where they may have engaged in illicit nuclear weapons activity. >> how would you respond to that? >> as how many other opponents of the agreement, vice president cheney has completed the agreements to make them sound bad. there are three aspeblgts to inspection. the first is the 24/7, anytime inspections of declared and known nuclear sites.
7:15 pm
cameras inside and a very strong inspection program. secondly, as secretary moniz pointed out, with respect to sites that are not known nuclear sites where the inspectors develop a suspicion, there's a process instituted that will require a prompt response and as a secretary, renounced nuclear scientist said, they can check on what happened and third, the so-called iranians doing their own inspections comes from a provision in the agreement which requires the international atom tick energy agency to make a report on iran's past military activities. the first step in that process is for the iranians to submit information to the international inspectors. that's the circumstance secretary cheney and others are trying to suggest and imply in their comments applies to all
7:16 pm
inspections, which is not the case. >> senator mitchell, before we go, as a former senate majority leader, i have to ask you about the latest round here between the majority and minor leaders. they are arguing whether this should face a 60-vote threshold through the filibuster process. is there anything more to this than the usual majority leader would like to see a 51 vote threshold and the minority always wants 60 vote threshold. is this standard argument we have heard before? >> as you know, lawrence, having served in the senate, both parties take exactly opposite positions, depending if they are in the majority or minority. when you are in the majority, you want to limit filibusters. when you are in the minority, you regard the filibuster as sacred and not to be tampered. both parties have used it but the record is clear the republicans have actively and much more aggressively used in
7:17 pm
the filibuster far more often than the democrats and the republican leader is on record on many occasions in the past saying the filibuster should be available for matters of the upmost important. and there's -- he doesn't describe any circumstance except the one coming up now in which it should not be available. this has gone on both parties, both sides for a long time. i don't think anyone takes it very seriously. >> former senate majority leader george mitchell. thank you for joining us. >> thank you, lawrence. breaking news from las vegas tonight. a british airways plane bursts in to flames on the runway. we will talk to one with of the passengers on that plane.
7:18 pm
7:19 pm
we have breaking news tonight in las vegas where british airways boeing 777 burst
7:20 pm
in to flames after experiencing an engine failure on take off. all of the passengers and crew were able to get off the plane by using emergency slides. seven people received medical treatment for minor injuries. a spokesperson for british airways said safety is always our priority. we are looking after customers after a technical issue with the aircraft. joining us now by phone dominick worthington, who was a passenger on that plane. mr. worthington, where were you on the plane when this happened? >> i was toward the front of the aircraft on the right side. >> what did you experience? how did you first realize you were in trouble? >> the plane was on the runway and we were traveling along at quite speed, expecting a normal takeoff and the nose started to come up and there was a slight
7:21 pm
jolt to one side and then a bang and evident something was wrong and the plane came to a halt pretty quick. the crew instructed everybody to evacuate and they deployed the slides and had to jump off and make their way off as quickly possible. >> could you see fire from where you were on the plane? >> yeah. after a few seconds, after we saw it come out of our seats we could see smoke and flames from the plane. pretty scary stuff. >> mr. worthington, was all of the fire on the outside of the plane, was there any fire inside the plane? >> from where i was, i couldn't see any smoke inside, but when the doors were open for evacuation, obviously there was a lot of smoke around the cabin, obviously the inside of the aircraft. it was pretty scary. i think further back, some passengers would have probably
7:22 pm
experienced some smoke inside for sure. >> how did the passengers react to this? did you hear screaming? what was the reaction? >> some people were of course i will reacting quite scared and stuff. other people seemed quite casual. some people even got their luggage from the overhead compartment which is crazy. but some were trying to get off the plane as quickly as possible and others seemed a little less fazed by it. but everyone got out with no injuries and stuff. the captain and crew, if it wasn't for them, there would have been some fatalities for sure. >> how about for yourself? what did you feel? were you terrified or did you feel this was under control? >> i felt it was under control and to be honest with you, the crew, it hit home when i was on
7:23 pm
top of the slide and it kicked in and smoke everywhere and the fire engine steaming toward you. pretty crazy stuff. >> dominick worthington, thank you for joining us tonight and we're very glad you are safe. up next, robert hager will join us on what could have gone wrong on that plane. what happened up there? in the nation, we know how you feel about your car. so when coverage really counts, you can count on nationwide. ♪ love because what's precious to you is precious to us. ♪ love is strange just another way we put members first. join the nation. ♪ baby... ♪ nationwide is on your side so you're a small business expert from at&t? yeah, give me a problem and i've got the solution. well, we have 30 years of customer records. our cloud can keep them safe and accessible anywhere. my drivers don't have time to fill out forms. tablets. keep it all digital.
7:24 pm
we're looking to double our deliveries. our fleet apps will find the fastest route. oh, and your boysenberry apple scones smell about done. ahh, you're good. i like to bake. add new business services with at&t and get up to $500 in total savings. more on the breaking news in las vegas. the faa lifted a ground stop for incoming flights after an engine on a british airways plane burst in to flames.
7:25 pm
all crew and passengers were able to get off by using emergency slides. seven suffered minor injuries. joining us bob hager an nbc news contributor. we heard from dominick worthington, a passenger on the plane, saying a no flame or smoke in the plane. certainly at the front end where he was. you have seen the images here. it seems like an engine fire. what is the best reckoning at this point of what was involve ed here? >> that's very complicated. normally an engine problem doesn't manifest the way this did with open flame and all of that smoke. the headline here is we are so fortunate. this was a very, very close call. emergency if that eng problem had developed seconds later when the plane had already lifted off and the entire crew and all of the passengers could have been goners if it happened once the plane was in the air and had to do a crash landing.
7:26 pm
and then, besides the fact that it happened on the ground an the pilot had enough room on the runway to get that plane stopped, you have this very, very fast evacuation. i mean sounds like it was five or six minutes to get that plane unloaded. imagine when a plane comes in to a gate however it takes you to get off. that's extremely fast and a real credit to the flight attendants an the crew for getting that plane evacuated so soon. we are very, very fortunate that this wasn't much worse. >> we heard dominick worthington, full of gratitude for the crew and the way they responded in getting everyone out of the airplane quickly. what are the precautions they have to take, bob, when they have got active flame outside of the airplane and they are trying to get passengers out of the airplane? >> that's a predicament because if the fire isn't in the plane already you have to open the doors so the passengers can get out. once you open the doors, you get
7:27 pm
the fresh oxygen from outside rushing in and that can suck the flames in, make the fire -- it's just -- assist the fire getting inside the plane. it has to be done carefully. when the pilots shut down the engine, when they first got the sign of trouble, it's supposed to shut off the intake valves so the fire and smoke doesn't get inside the cabin but there's no assurance of that. >> robert hager, thank you for joining us tonight. really appreciate it. coming up, what will kim dafls, the jailed county clerk in kentucky do tomorrow when she goes back to work and seeings her deputy clerks issuing same-sex marriage licenses? audible safety beeping the nissan rogue, with safety shield technologies.
7:28 pm
the only thing left to fear is you imagination. nissan. innovation that excites. so whgetting better dental checkups than me, i decided to go pro... with crest pro-health advanced. my mouth is getting healthier. my teeth are getting stronger. this crest toothpaste is superior in five areas. great checkup. before i had the shooting, burning, pins-and-needles of these feet...e pain, ...served my country... ...carried the weight of a family... ...and walked a daughter down the aisle. but i couldn't bear my diabetic nerve pain any longer. so i talked to my doctor and he prescribed lyrica. nerve damage from diabetes causes diabetic nerve pain. lyrica is fda-approved to treat this pain. lyrica may cause serious allergic reactions or suicidal thoughts or actions.
7:29 pm
tell your doctor right away if you have these, new, or worsening depression, or unusual changes in mood or behavior. or swelling, trouble breathing, rash, hives, blisters, muscle pain with fever, tired feeling, or blurry vision. common side effects are dizziness, sleepiness, weight gain and swelling of hands, legs and feet. don't drink alcohol while taking lyrica. don't drive or use machinery until you know how lyrica affects you. those who have had a drug or alcohol problem may be more likely to misuse lyrica. now i have less diabetic nerve pain. and my biggest reason to walk... ...calls me grandpa. ask your doctor about lyrica. layover. 24 hours. hello, reykjavik. oh, so that's how you spell it. what are you looking at? oh, cool. hungry. fish, anyone? hello, seventh waterfall of the day. hello, duck boat. hello, sheep? oh right! itchy icelandic sweaters and no foreign transaction fees. sweet. one last look. ahh. triple points. and we're off. what's next? wherever the journey takes you, carry american express gold.
7:30 pm
it's more than a card. it's the gear that gets it done.
7:31 pm
mike huckabee and ted kruds took their campaigns to offer support for kim davis who was jailed last week for contempt of court after she refused to issue marchs licenses to same-sex couples. the huckabee campaign was a sponsor of a rally for kim davis, which to their surprise, turned out to be a celebration of the release of kim davis by federal judge david bunning, who said he decided to release the clerk because the deputy clerks are now issuing marriage
7:32 pm
licenses to same-sex couples. the judge's order said "the court is therefore satisfied the rowan county clerk's office is fulfilling its obligation to issue marriage licenses consistent with the u.s. supreme court's holding in obergefell. for these reasons the court's prior contempt sanction against defendant kim davis is here by lifted. kim davis took the stage and said this -- >> thank you all so much. i love you all so very much. i just want to give god the glory. hiez people have rallied and you
7:33 pm
are a strong people! we serve a living god, who knows exactly where each and every one of us is at. just keep on pressin'. don't let down. because he is here. he is worthy. i love you guys. thank you so much. >> kim davis did not take questions but nbc's gabe gutierrez asked kim davis' lawyer what she plans to do tomorrow. >> we're told by some of the people that received them mrs. davis' name was not on the license. is that the case or not? if so, what does she plan to do tomorrow? >> the licenses issued were issued without the authority of rowan county and they are not valid. there are criminal laws in kentucky that say if you issue a
7:34 pm
license to someone that is not authorized by statute that there are criminal penalties for that. kim davis because of the -- [ inaudible ] chose not to issue any licenses. >> joining us is scott white, kentucky attorney and former deputy attorney general for kentucky. so, mr. white, what's the story with these marriage licenses? is there any question as to their legitimacy. >> none at all? they are absolutely legitimate. the office of the county attorneys empowered by the state legislature that issue marriage licenses, there's a statute that says to use a uniform form. it is technicality but not the type folks talk about when they think of smart, clever lawyers to get them out of things.
7:35 pm
it is a technicality that doesn't have any real meaning. the fact that the deputy clerks put down rowan county clerk, instead of miss davis county clerk will have no affect at all. it is really a fairly nonsensical position to take. they are invoking a state law that says if a clerk or deputy clerk issues a marriage license that is contrary to law, in other words, people that are not eligible to be married. say they are under aged or they don't have the appropriate identifications and they are trying to trick the state in to doing it, and the deputy goes along with it. those are the kind of criminal penalties. they are conflating i think a wish and a hope. i believe the licenses are valid and i would be shocked if a federal court got involved in it. it is such a purely state law issue i imagine the judge bunning and sixth circuit will
7:36 pm
say go litigate that in state circuit court. >> is there a way to litigate it? who could bring -- who with would have standing to challenge these licenses? >> well, that's a good question. i reckon you could make an argument that she has standing since she's the elected office holder. obviously the folks that got married would have standing. i can't imagine they'd challenge it. perhaps you could wrap up some argument that perhaps a rowan county resident would take the position that the clerk acted outside of the scope of their power, and that would be an original writ action. >> scott white, thank you for joining us and clarifying that point. >> you are welcome. thank you. joining us now former vermont governor howard with dean. i want you to listen to something another former
7:37 pm
governor governor said today, mike huckabee which was designed to be a campaign event arranged by his campaign. he's willing to do the time for kim davis. let's listen to this. >> let kim go! but if you have to put someone in jail, i volunteer to go. let me go. lock me up. if you think that's how freedom is best served. folks, i am willing to spend the next eight years in the white house leading this country, but i want you to know i'm willing to spend the next eight years in jail but i'm not willing to spend one day under the tyranny of people who believe they can take our freedom and conscience away. >> all right, governor, i don't know what the question is after hearing that. your reaction? has anyone explained to mike
7:38 pm
huckabee you have to commit the crime yourself to actually end up in jail? >> look, i've known mike huckabee for a long time. this is politics, lawrence. >> tell me about this. you know mike huckabee and known him for a long time. what do you see when you see him on that stage saying this preposterous thing? >> i see a guy at 2% in the polls and trying to get some constituents, in this case evangelical christians to pay attention to him. that is the problem with the primary, 17 people and seven won't get to the finish line -- the starting line, i mean and mike is one of them. he won the iowa caucuses and now he is at 2%. this is not the mike huckabee i know. this makes no sense whatsoever. >> what about this as a general issue for the republicans in this campaign? >> it is a disaster.
7:39 pm
makes them look like bigots. they have enough trouble with trump running around attacking mexican immigrants and trump saying -- it didn't work and won't work better in 2016. if i was reince, priebus i'd be wringening my hands right now. tom brady was asked in boston today if he will vote for his pal donald trump.
7:40 pm
7:41 pm
verizon now has one simple plan. just pick a size. small, medium, large and extra large. if you need less data, pick small. if you need more, go with extra large-- a whopping 12 gigs for $80 a month plus $20 per phone. pick a size. change it up anytime. it's the simple way to get the best network. and now, get $300 when you switch. only at verizon.
7:42 pm
when it helps giveshot ma lifesaving vaccine to a child in need in a developing country. thanks to customers like you, walgreens "get a shot. give a shot." program has helped provide seven million vaccines. make your flu shot make a world of difference. walgreens. at the corner of happy and healthy. at the beginning of this hour tonight, you'll remember rachel maddow told me she believes tom brady has a donald trump make america great again hat in his locker. and that it is ironic. that surely it is not a con at the present time, that trump is not a con at the present time tom brady could believe in.
7:43 pm
tom brady clarified that on a boston radio show this morning. he explained that donald trump gave the hat to patriots owner robert kraft to pass on to tom brady and then he told the rest of the story about that hat and if he would vote for donald trump. here it is. >> i've known him for, since 2002. i judged one of his beauty pageants. imagine that. i was a judge at a miss usa pageant 2002. so i've known him for a long time and, you know, he always gives me a call and different types of motivational speeches at different times. now he is running for president he sent me a hat and gave it to rkk a couple of weeks ago. so it found its way in to my locker. >> are you going to vote for him? >> i don't know. am i going to vote for him? that's a good question. >> so it turned out that miss
7:44 pm
usa judge was simply not going to answer that question. even with tom brady's vote, donald trump couldn't win mast nst in the election but two that could are being asked the same questions over and over with joe biden, is it are you going to run. with hillary clinton it is are you sorry? that's next. just might be the one. to clean the oceans, to start a movement, or lead a country. it may not be obvious yet, but one of these kids is going to change the world. we just need to make sure she has what she needs. welcome to windows 10. the future starts now for all of us. so this beauty can be yours and 10% financing.ment
7:45 pm
oh larry, lawrence. thanks to the tools and help at, i know i have a 798 fico score. [score alert text sound] [score alert text sound] oh. that's the sound of my interest rate going down. according to this score alert, my fico score just went up to 816. 816. 816! 816! fico scores are used in 90% of credit decisions. so get your credit swagger on. go to, become a member of experian credit tracker, and take charge of your score. ethey have smart online tools, which saves money. they settle claims quickly, which saves money. they drive an all-hybrid claims fleet, which saves money. they were born online, and built to save money, which means when they save, you save. click or call.
7:46 pm
7:47 pm
tonight, hillary clinton for the first time clearly said she is sorry for the way she handled her e-mail at the state department. >> what i had done was allowed. it was above board. but in retrospect certainly, as i look back at it now, even though it was allowed i should have used two accounts. one for personal, one for work-related e-mails. that was a mistake. i'm sorry about that.
7:48 pm
i take responsibility. i'm trying to be as transparent as i can. >> this is how secretary clinton phrased it with andrea mitchell on friday. >> so at the end of the day, i am sorry that this has been confusing to people and has raised a lot of questions, but there are answers to all of these questions and i will continue to provide those answers and those answers have been confirmed and affirmed by the state department and by other government officials, and eventually i'll get to testify in public and i'm sure it will be a long, grueling time there, but all of the questions will be answered and i take responsibility and it wasn't the best choice. >> we're with joined now by joy reid, msnbc national correspondent. joy, for hillary clinton, question one, two and three is still e-mail, e-mail, e-mail. >> absolutely. if anything what hillary clinton is guilty of is violating an iron law of politics, which is
7:49 pm
never take a simple story and make it complicated. you have a story where she is sending e-mails to people this the state department and other government e-mails whose e-mails are public. therefore all the e-mails are discoverable one way or the other and later after she is gone from the state department some of the information in the e-mails gets classified. lo and behold, it is misreported she sent classified e-mails an we're off to the races. the clintons can never escape this kind of thing. there is always some sorry that places them at the center of ka canary and the media will drill in to them until they collapse or apologize. now you have hillary clinton doing the latter to which -- which creates an ap headline. the apology apparently makes it worse.
7:50 pm
>> there is something fascinating about seeing any candidate apologize for anything in the season of trump where he's said the most outrageous things of any candidate. the apologies have been demanded and he refused every time. his approach is to make the notion of apology look like weakness and nothing else. >> donald trump isn't hillary clinton. donald trump is not going to be the president of the united states and hillary clinton is. this is kabuki in some ways. the media wants their pound of flesh. they had a story that wasn't really a story, as joy says, and they kept changing the goal post. first there was some supposed russian influence in the clinton foundation. that turned out not to be true. and then "new york times" reported that hillary clinton was criminally investigated. that turned out not to be true and classified e-mail. that was not true because it wasn't classified until after she left. despite the reporting in the new york times that said it was and
7:51 pm
the inspector general said it wasn't the state department denied that. i have maintained for a long time, this is a candidate ritual. they want to humiliate the front runner. they always do it and the front runner capitulated and probably smarter politics than i would have done because i would have fought it until the end but look at where this got me. this is kabuki. she has to wipe the slate tend, no pun intended and they get their pound of flesh. since there isn't really a story i think it will go away with. if trump gets the nomination he will have his moment in the sun because they will go after him. >> lths listen to joe biden talking about bernie sanders. >> populous biden got up today, probably competing with bernie sanders, doing a hell of a job,
7:52 pm
by the way, with bernie sanders. >> joy reid, there he was at a labor day speech praising bernie sanders. >> absolutely. reports i got out of miami when he was down there holding meetings with jewish americans to try to calm them on the iran deal, the report i got back is he did a lot of praising bernie sanders there, too. what he is doing is smart. he understands the sanders wing is the elizabeth warren party. he is courting both to use them for future use po ten sglshl he is encouraging the opposition to hillary clinton as the front runner. >> i don't agree with that. look, i say good things about bernie sanders and i'm fully in hillary clinton's camp. bernie is running a hell of a campaign and saying a lot of things that need to be said. that is the way sdwroe is. he says what he thinks. i don't think he is plotting and planning here. i think he is saying what he thinks and i think he is right. >> howard dean gets the last
7:53 pm
word on the campaign tonight. joy reid will stay with us and talk about her new book. it is about barack obama and the clintons. equals great rates.
7:54 pm
7:55 pm
here's my copy of joy reid's new book. we're going to talk about all the good parts which is pretty much the whole book next. it's not muted. was that you jason? it was geoffrey! it was jason. it could've been brenda. audible safety beeping audible safety beeping the nissan rogue, with safety shield technologies. the only thing left to fear is you imagination. nissan. innovation that excites. ethey have smart online tools, which saves money.
7:56 pm
they settle claims quickly, which saves money. they drive an all-hybrid claims fleet, which saves money. they were born online, and built to save money, which means when they save, you save. click or call. everyone loves the picture i posted of you. at&t reminds you it can wait. in her new book joy reid writes the obama era had seen the party move leftward on
7:57 pm
issues from what obama termed mid le-class economics to gay right answer the most visitable leaders were liberals like massachusetts senator and wall street nemesis elizabeth warren and bill de blasio. to win the white house, hillary clinton the new democrat would have to prove to the liberal base of the party that she was one of them. >> the clintons and the racial divide. that's a provocative title. and kind of poetic. it leaves itself open to interpretation. is this about a fracture between obama and hillary clinton? >> for a time, '. i think the two of them fought over the legacy really the fundamental legacy of the democratic party in 2008. whether it was going to be the lyndon johnson legacy of civil rights and inclusion or the repudiation of the johnson legacy, which is what bill clinton's political career was basically built on. saying we are moving the party
7:58 pm
to the right for the good of the party's chances. >> how do you see -- this book is fascinating because you are talking about the history of that campaign, the obama versus clinton campaign. at the same time, talking about the current presidential race. how does the campaign of eight years ago affect what we are watching with now? >> i think for one thing it put in the minds of white and black americans two polarized expectations of what the first black president could theoretically mean. for african-americans the campaign geared them up. whereas the way obama came to national prominence set up the expectation of a lot of white americans he was going to get us past our racial past. and really talk about the progress. neither of those expectations wound up being met. so you have barack obama facing these multiple backlashes where he had to decide whether he was
7:59 pm
going to be a president who is incidentally black or embrace the black part of being a black president and he wound up pushed in to doing the latter. >> you talk about rules for black politicians, black politicians elected outside of black majority districts. what are those rules and obviously president obama is the most successful of them. >> absolutely. they talk about the communities needs and speak in racial language. they can do that because of the composition of their district. you get to a national politician, like jesse jackson who used the same explicit language of needs for the poor, for lgbt people, needs for african-american, that can't fly on a national level. to be a successful black politician you have to be what one calls the least angry black person in america and we are talking about president obama. you have to reinforce the country's need to feel affirmed about how good we are. talk about our goodness.
8:00 pm
amazing grace is a good example. you have to talk about the country's progress. you are not supposed to remind the country of what is left to do and the minute that barack obama did that, the minute he spoke in racial terms >> tonight on "all in." decision 2016 descends on grace in kentucky. >> if somebody needs to go, aisle going to go in her place. >> the latest on the spectacle to stop same-sex marriage in kentucky. then, colonel lawrence wilkerson on dick cheney's downward spiral. >> didn't you leave the administration, leave president obama with a mess? >> well, i don't think of it that way. >>s,