tv The Rachel Maddow Show MSNBC November 7, 2018 6:00pm-7:00pm PST
one party rule in any area is bad, but in this case, what you don't see from democrats, though, is you don't see democrats deliberately targeting republican constituencies in such a manner as to restrict the electorate to their benefit. that's something that has a long history in the united states of america. once upon a time, it was democrats who were violently trying to restrict the electorate so republicans couldn't vote. but you see republicans trying to ensure that the electorate is older and whiter so they can continue winning elections, even though the majority of the people in a given state don't actually support what they're doing. part of the way they do that is they run on white identity politics. when you look at progressive initiatives, medicaid was expanded in three red states yesterday. it's not that americans don't like -- don't like those kinds of things. it's that -- >> okay. i've got to cut you off there, adam. thank you both for joining us.
that is "all in" for this evening. "the rachel maddow show" starts now. >> it was great to have you in texas last night. >> it was a very interesting night in that state's politics with huge implications for what happens next in the nation's politics. >> seeing that senate race, and we're all laser focused on that, to see beto o'rourke not get there, but that just tells you how many doors that opened in that hugely important state. thanks for joining us this hour. happy, happy, to have you with us. a lot going on, right? one of those times i feel very, very blessed to have this job. in march of this year, a guy who was going to run for senate in nevada announced that he was not going to run after all. he said, quite proudly, that the only reason he was backing out is because he personally received a call from the president of the united states,
and the president's team imploring him for the good of the republican party to please not run for senate this year, as he was otherwise intending. the white house later confirmed that, in fact, the president had done that. the president called this guy in nevada, danny tarkanian, who has lost every time in nevada. the president called him and told him not to run for senate this year, so as to clear the way for republican u.s. senator dean heller to run for re-election in nevada without the hassle of having a republican primary challenge. so the president intervened to keep that primary challenger out, to clear the way for dean heller. so dean heller could be re-elected. trump endorsed senator dean heller last night lost his re-election race. he lost his seat in the u.s. senate. he was beaten by a democrat named jacky rosen, who was a democratic member of congress who had to give up her seat to run against dean heller.
that was a good bargain for her. she'll be coming back to washington as a u.s. senator instead as a member of congress. because she had to leave her seat in congress in order to run for the senate, that left her congressional seat open. and this is where the trump genius came in. having advised danny tarkanian that he wasn't allowed to run in the senate primary against dean heller to ensure that heller would hold on to his seat, and trump then promoted the hack out of dan yeah tarkanian to be the republican nominee for that house seat, for the one that was vacated by congresswoman jacky rosen. last night, that trump candidate, he lost that race, too. he lost that house seat to a democrat named suzy lee. but the president believes he has real political genius when he comes to these things and
he's not shy about doing this anywhere in the country. just a few weeks after that brilliant danny tarkanian presidential election that cost the republicans a seat in the senate and in the house, the president waded into another race in south carolina where he decided that in a congressional primary in south carolina, he would direct his followers to no longer support republican congressman mark sanford, who the president decided was unsufficiently pro-trump. so the president just came in the deep end with this endorsement, mark sanford has been very unhelpful to me in my campaign to maga. he is m.i.a. and nothing but trouble. i endorse katie arrington for congress in south carolina. katie arrington, on the strength of that high-impact endorsement
from the president, beat mark sanford in that primary. the president has been gleefully rubbing that in against mark sanford ever since, and pounding his chest about how he cost mark sanford his seat in congress. i am potus, here my roar. last night was the general election in south carolina, just like it was everywhere. and last night, presidentially endorsed katie arrington lost that seat to a democrat named joe cunningham. did i mention that was south carolina? just won by a democrat. a few weeks after president trump applied his uncare legaled presidential political genius to the katie arrington, mark sanford race, which cost the republicans a seat in the house, the president also confidently waded into the kansas governor's race. when republicans were decide thing year who was going to be their candidate for governor,
they had a choice between a normal conservative republican or a much, much, much trumpier choice named kris kobach. immensely controversial, very high profile, kansas secretary of state. sort of a special white house adviser on nonexistent voter fraud. in that kansas primary to decide who the republican party's candidate would be for governor in kansas, the president decided he would exert his political genius and weigh in. he announced his total endorsement in that primary for kris kobach. coback won that primary. presumably in part on the strength of the president's endorsement. kris kobach went on to the general election last night as the republican candidate for governor in kansas, and he is the republican candidate for governor who lost the kansas governorship to a democrat named laura kelly. and it wasn't even that close. and kris kobach's dead weight at the top of the ticket in kansas
may have been enough to cost kansas republican congressman kevin yoder his seat, as well. criskris kobach lost to a cat, congressman kevin yoder lost to a democrat, as well. to a guy native american female mma fighter named shareece davis, who is a democrat. because the president's political genius knows no bounds. republican congressman dave brat of virginia, remember when he complained about all the women getting up in his grill? how much he hated his female constituents to hold a town natural last night, dave brat got all of the women out of his grill. that won't be a problem anymore. last night, he lost his seat in congress to a democratic woman, who is a cia veteran. do you remember all the indivisible protests against the
congressman in new jersey? last night, that seat also flipped to a democratic woman veteran. do you remember the individual protests against congressman darrell issa? california? last night his seat went to a democrat named mike leaven. republican congressman scott taylor in virginia, you might remember he got in serious trouble this year during the campaign when he and his office tried on a little scheme to fake petition signatures to get a fake third party candidate onto the ballot to hopefully divert votes from the democrat running against him. last night, congressman scott taylor in virginia lost his seat in congress when that democratic challenger beat him any way. in minnesota, a republican congressman named jason lewis, he's had the whole idea of minnesota nice, sort of straining at the seams a little bit. congressman jason lewis publicly complained at length and on tape
that he's not allowed to call women sluts anymore. last might, he lost his seat in congress to a woman, who actually seems very nice, no matter what he might call her. her name is angie craig, the democrat who has ousted jason lewis from congress. in new york state, john faso ran ads against his opponent, who was a freaking lawyer and a rhodes scholar, trying to make his constituents believe he was a crazy gang member only running so that he could beat people up. january faso lost his seat in congress to that democratic candidate, antonio delgado. mike bishop lost his seat to a democratic candidate named alyssa slotkin, another cia
veteran. do you remember that ad that highlighted the national security back grounds of eight first-time female democrats who were run thing year? she was one of the women. five of the eight women in that ad won their seats last night and ousted republican incumbents. in california, republican congressman steve knight just lost his seat to democrat katie hill. she will be caking his seat in the house. in illinois, republican congressman randy holgren lost his seat to a nurse, lauren underwood. neither of them were on anybody's radar. lauren underwood came out of nowhere and won that seat through sheer hard work and raw talent. she's going to be a national star. she's going to be our guest a little later on this hour. you're going to want to see that. last night, democrats flipped control of the colorado senate and the maine senate and the minnesota house and the new hampshire house and the new hampshire senate and the new
york state senate. in nevada, democrats got everything, the governorship, they took away dean heller's u.s. senate seat and within one vote of a democratic supermajority. in wisconsin, u.s. senator tammy wa baldwin not only one re-election over a trump endorsed opponent, she crushed it, double digits. democrats won the attorney general's race, as well. democrats did lose u.s. senate seats, and the florida senate seat looks like it's going to a recount. although we did learn that democrat jon tester looks to have held on to his seat. in georgia, the governor's race there will be an ongoing, all-out battle. where honestly we have now entered into the sort of civic nightmare scenario where it comes down to a fragile little
thin margins of disparate ballots from all over the state, and all of it will be overseen by one of the two candidates, who is also in charge of doing all that counting. tonight, remarkably, republican secretary of state brian kemp tried to have his office, his secretary of state office announce that he had won the election. but with no details to back it up. democratic candidate stacey abrams has announced her campaign has started an all-out ballot chasing program to make sure that kemp is not allowed to determine his own fate, a and that every single vote is counted in a way that's fair and transparent, and provable. that georgia governor's thing is going to be a big national deal for a long while yet. national eyes will be on that for good reason until that is settled. there are ongoing races that are as yet uncalled. it may be deep into this weekend before we know who won the arizona senate race for example.
there are absurdities in last night's results, like two republican members of congress who have each been charged with multiple felonies, they're both literally on trial for multiple felony corruption counts. they both got re-elected. congressman chris collins in new york, and congressman duncan hunter in california, they will be able to simultaneously be able to solicit new campaign contributions from their sucker constituents. i mean, you can buy them phone cards or help them run for re-election, right? send them fritos. are they going to still get to do constituent service hours at visiting time? need an issue? just go and sit across the glass, pick up the phone. can you still be on a committee if you're in prison? so there was some absurdities.
last night was a wild night. veteran texas republican congressman pete sessions, 11-term pete sessions and john culberson lost their seats to democrats in texas. a republican congressman from oklahoma city, a race that barely anybody bothered to poll, lost his seat to a democratic woman named kendra horn. the democrats broke supermajorities in the north carolina house and senate, and in the michigan senate and the pennsylvania senate. the number of states where democrats have complete control in state government went from eight before last night to 14 as of today. that means control of the governorship and both houses of the legislature. but the story of the night, and the determinative political change that we just went through last night as a country is what
happened thanks to the democrats just romping in the house. nancy pelosi will be speaker of the house once again. adam schiff will be the intelligence committee. elijah cummings will run house oversight. oversight did somebody say? in 2006 when nancy pelosi became speaker the first time, that was an election in which democrats felt their asendance was a few years overdue. the first midterm election in the george w. bush era, it was just after 9/11, the president had started one war and about to start a second, so 2002 was one of those rare midterm election where is the president's party didn't lose ground. it was just a singular different thing. but by the next midterm election, 2006, democrats more than made up for it. they won seats by the dozen. they won control of the congress
and nancy pelosi became speaker. right after that 2006 midterm, when democrats picked up so many seats and did so well and took back control on capitol hill, right after that, the bush administration responded to that election result immediately. this has sort of been lost. i heard andrea mitchell mention this today. i was like oh, yeah, this was this day 12 years ago. the day after the 2006 midterms, after we learned for the first time that nancy pelosi would be speaker of the house, the day after the midterms in '06, that's when president bush fired donald rumsfeld. remember that? secretary of defense. that was seen essentially as a concession, an effort to stop the political bleeding. voters in that 2006 race voted
for democrats up and down the ballot. voters were clearly furious about the course of the iraq war. donald rumsfeld was not only running that war, he was essentially its public defender in chief. so after that, the bush white house responded to that scream from the voters by pushing him out the very next day. now, today, we've got something that's not exactly a parallel. today, it's 12 years later. voters last night screamed once more. democrats took control of congress once again. nancy pelosi will once again be speaker. and now today, the day after the election, another cabinet official has been fired immediately after the elections, right? but this is basically the opposite of what happened in 2006. this time with this firing, instead of making a concession as to what the voters clearly wanted, what the voters said they were concerned about when they went to the polls and voted
against the president and the president's party, this time the firing of a cabinet official appears to have been done not out of an effort to try to answer the voter's concern, this time it quite clearly has been done out of fear, the president's fear. the president firing attorney general jeff sessions today appears to be a defensive move, to try to stop the special counsel's investigation before democrats actually get sworn in for the new congress. whereupon they would have power through their control on capitol hill to protect that investigation. so i think the timing of this announcement today by the white house was designed clearly to step on the tail of the election results from last year, to replace that story with a new white house controversy. but there's no reason to see these two things as two stiff stories. there's no reason to split screen this. this is all one thing. democrats controlling congress means they can provide protection to the special
counsel's office, to the fbi, to the career prosecutors and investigators who are pursuing this unprecedented investigation into the president and his campaign, which has already resulted in over 100 felony charges and created this odd spectacle where all these people of the president's campaign and his business are right now awaiting sentencing on federal felony charges. even as we headed into that first midterm election last night. i mean, under normal circumstances, the president firing an attorney general, the way you would know that was a normal firing, is because the attorney general would be fired, and that would almost automatically elevate the number two person at the justice department, the deputy attorney general into the top job. on an acting basis. remember sally yates from the whole mike flynn controversy during the first few days of the trump administration? the reason she was acting attorney for that whole controversy is she had been deputy attorney general under
loretta lynch. when loretta lynch left her post, that elevated sally yates from deputy attorney general to be acting attorney general. so that's why she was acting attorney general, she had to do all that crazy stuff once people who appeared to be agents of a form p foreign power started moving into the white house. under normal circumstances, firing jeff sessions for any reason would elevate this hapma deputy attorney general rod rosenstein to be acting attorney general. the president didn't just fire attorney general jeff session and have rod rosenstein step into the to be job to fill the gig until somebody else could be nominated to take the job full time. instead, he fired the attorney general jeff sessions and instantly installed a new guy, who has been described as trump's eyes and ears in the justice department for months
now. he installed a new guy to become the acting attorney general, slotting him in above rod rosenstein. and the new guy will take over instantly all of the work at the justice department, including taking control of the mueller investigation, taking control of the mueller investigation away from rod rosenstein. putting it instead in the hands of this trump loyalist. if the justice department's announcements are to be believed, rod rosenstein no longer oversees the mueller investigation. this guy that trump just installed, matt whittaker, rob reports to him, which means robert mueller's budget is controlled by him, and whittaker has a say over anything mueller wants to do, including new indictments, new avs of investigation. a report to anyone about his findings, any major step, it all has to go through matt whittaker now, who the president just
installed on his own say so. no warning. and he had to leapfrog the order of succession at the justice department in order to do it. so there are questions we need to answer about that, right? there's one thing you need to know about it. question number one, isn't there an ethics process at the justice department that might predent matt whittaker to recuse from overseeing the mueller investigation on the basis of his many public statements, criticizing the mueller investigation saying it should be shut down or curtailed? this is not something where we perceive matt whittaker as an objective ago no, sirragnostic . he was basically a professional pundit whose whole job was
talkitalk ing smack about the mueller investigation. once you've publicly opined on something like that, you shouldn't be involved as an official. isn't there an ethics department that is supposed to police that? that's question one. question two. if the answer to that is yes, if career ethics officials at the justice department have looked into this and made a determination as to whether or not matt whittaker should be recused from overseeing the mueller investigation, would we know about that? and if they told him he had to recuse and he shouldn't oversee that investigation, would he have to follow their instructions? and number three, the special counsel's office is not commenting, as usual. but is there any other way we can get visibility whether or not this move by president trump today, to fire jeff sessions as attorney general, instead to leapfrog the line of succession at the justice department and
install this loyalist, who is an opponent of the mueller investigation, can we see -- are we allowed to tell whether and when and how this is a live, active white house effort right this second to shut down mueller's investigation? now, i said those were questions we need answers to. i think we can get answers to all of those questions tonight, and we're going to try to over the course of this hour. i said there was one thing i think you should know that i'm going to tell you about this tonight, and one thing i want to tell you, is that there are groups across the country who have been preparing for months now, for the inevitable day when president trump would take action to end the mueller investigation. today, those groups decided that this is it. this is the break glass in case of emergency moment for which they have been preparing and organizing for months. and so they have said it's a go.
tomorrow at 5:00 p.m. local time, all over the country, there are already over 900 protests planned to #protectmueller. you have been reading for months about these organizing efforts about what people should do in case of emergency to save mueller's team, to save its work, to preserve this investigation. the groups who have been working on this decided today that what happened today with the firing of jeff sessions and the installation of this new guy to oversee the mueller investigation, the groups decided that today is that emergency. so we expect protests all over the country, tomorrow, 5:00 p.m. local time. i just looked on line before i got onset. there are more than 900 planned across the country. we'll have some expert advice coming up in terms of answering some of those questions. we have congresswoman elect lauren underwood later this
hour. stay with us. the deep south. this thanksgiving... in the deep south, there's gonna be problems. when you see me worried... tony. you'll know if i'm worried. how about some quiet time. it's amazing you said that, my wife used to say that all the time. their journey inspired an unexpected friendship. i don't think i ever met anyone with your appetite. [ laughing ] ♪ ♪ i can do more to lower my a1c. because my body can still make its own insulin. and i take trulicity once a week to activate my body to release it, like it's supposed to. trulicity is not insulin. it comes in a once-weekly, truly easy-to-use pen. and it works 24/7. trulicity is an injection to improve blood sugar in adults with type 2 diabetes when used with diet and exercise. don't use it as the first medicine to treat diabetes, or if you have type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. don't take trulicity if you or your family
have medullary thyroid cancer, you're allergic to trulicity, or have multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2. stop trulicity and call your doctor right away if you have symptoms of a serious allergic reaction, a lump or swelling in your neck, or severe stomach pain. serious side effects may include pancreatitis. taking trulicity with a sulfonylurea or insulin increases your low blood sugar risk. common side effects include nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, abdominal pain, and decreased appetite. these can lead to dehydration, which may worsen kidney problems. to help lower my a1c i choose trulicity to activate my within. ask your doctor about once-weekly trulicity. means they won't hike your rates over one mistake. to help lower my a1c i choose trulicity to activate my within. see, liberty mutual doesn't hold grudges. for drivers with accident forgiveness, liberty mutual won't raise their rates because of their first accident. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ shaquem get in here. take your razor, yup.
alright, up and down, never side to side, shaquem. you got it? come on, get back. quem, you a second behind your brother, stay focused. can't nobody beat you, can't nobody beat you. hard work baby, it gonna pay off. you got this. with the one hundred and forty-first pick, the seattle seahawks select. alright, you got it, shaquem. alright, let me see.
about special counsel robert mueller. "mueller's investigation of trump is going too far. the president is absolutely correct. mueller has come up to a red line in the russia 2016 election meddling investigation, that he's dangerously close to crossing. if he were to continue to investigate the financial relationships without a broadened scope in his appointment, this would raise serious concerns that the special counsel's investigation was, indeed, a mere witch hunt." same guy retweeted articles saying the president's lawyers should not cooperate with "mueller's lynch mob." when a bipartisan group of senators drafted bills to protect the special counsel's office from political interference from the white house, this same person argued that would be a mistake, and mueller was "already protected enough." that same person also went on tv repeatedly to suggest strategies that might undercut the special counsel or shut down the investigation all together.
>> i can see a scenario where jeff sessions is replaced with a recess appointment, and that attorney general doesn't fire bob mueller, just reduces his budget so low that his investigation grinds to almost a halt. >> today, the person who wrote all those things and said all those things attacking the special counsel's office and proposing ways to destroy their investigation or stop it in its tracks, today, that person got a new job. he will now be in charge of overseeing the robert mueller investigation. when the president fired attorney general jeff sessions, he did not allow sessions' deputy, rod rosenstein, to become the acting attorney general, which would be the normal course of events. he instead installed matt whittaker, who used to have a job as a full-time pundit, railing against the mueller investigation. he, as of today, has been in charge of it. what happens now? joining us now is david loftman,
one of his roles was to oversee the russia investigation at the justice department before robert mueller was appointed. it's an honor to have you with us tonight. thank you for having time. >> good to be with you. >> am i right that it is not the normal course of events that somebody knew would be installed in the acting attorney general's role rather than allowing the deputy attorney general to step up into that higher position? >> i can't say it's never been done before, but it's unusual, especially with such an experienced attorney general as rod rosenstein ready to step up and assume that position. >> obviously, mr. whittaker, as acting attorney general, i understand he can serve in that role for something like seven months, before he needs to be replaced. he could be there until this summer. as acting attorney general, he'll oversee everything at the justice department. the justice department making clear that includes the mueller investigation. there is this issue of whether or not he ought to be recused
from that, though, based on his public statements, criticizing the investigation, talking about curtailing it and ways to shut it down. that's how it seems to me from a layman's perspective. how do you see that in >> he may not be under a legal obligation to recuse himself like attorney general sessions was because of attorney general session' involvement in the trump campaign. but there is, to put it kindly, a grotesque of an appearance of conflict by virtue of his statements questioning the scope of the special counsel's investigation. now the fox has been put in charge of the chicken coop. there's reason for alarm about the ability of special counsel mueller and his team to complete all the necessary, logical investigative steps and charging decisions, if any, that remain ahead, the writing and transmittal of a report to congress that would be carried
out, if left to their discretion. >> when ethics officials at the justice department advise senior officials on whether or not they need to recuse from something, do we have any transparency in that process? are we the public ever allowed to know either -- can we ask for a statement about what kind of statement has been given? and if that advice has been given to mr. whittaker in conjunction with this case, would he be obliged to follow that advice? >> well, there is an ethics apparatus at the department of justice, in rod rosenstein's office. one of rod's senior staff people is the senior ethics official for the department. i happen to know that individual. he's a fine lawyer, a fine person, a long-time career official. if asked to, i'm sure he would produce a fine legal analysis with a recommendation. this is a more subjective kind of you know it when you see it.
it should be so obvious that someone with statements atributed to him that before whittaker has, should have nothing to do with oversight of the mueller investigation. and so an ethics insurrection arises within the department where he is pressed on to recuse himself, it's improbable he's going to give any credence to recommendations that he recuse himself. and it's inconceivable that he would recuse himself, because the president installed him in this job to get rid of an attorney general who could -- who was recused. so it's just -- we are in this hall of mirrors here where we are now stuck with a perilous situation at the department, and we are going to have to rely on the moral courage and fortitude of people like rod rosenstein and other department officials to speak truth to power and to advise the incoming attorney general as forcefully as they can what steps they think he should take that are in the best interest of the department of justice.
>> david laufman, chief counterintelligence section at the justice department, which meant that he happen an oversight in the russian investigation before special counsel robert mueller was appointed. mr. laufman, i know speaking publicly on these matters is not your favorite thing in the world. thank you, sir. >> thank you, rachel. this is a serious step by the president. i just want to undermore what mr. laufman said in terms of relying on people within the justice department, essentially to squawk, to allow it to be known what's going on there. if, in fact, we have a crisis of ethics in the justice department, and if, in fact, this move was done to obstruct justice, to shut down the investigation that is lawfully pursuing these matters. more to come tonight. we'll be joined by a leading member of the senate judiciary committee and congresswoman elect lauren underwood. stay with us.
your brain changes as you get older. but prevagen helps your brain with an ingredient originally discovered... in jellyfish. in clinical trials, prevagen has been shown to improve short-term memory. prevagen. healthier brain. better life. then you might have a dcondition called dry mouth.? biotène is clinically proven to soothe and moisturize a dry mouth. plus, it freshens breath. biotène. immediate and long lasting dry mouth symptom relief. so lionel, what does 24/5 mean to you?rade well, it means i can trade after the market closes. it's true. so all... evening long. ooh, so close. yes, but also all...
night through its entirety. come on, all... the time from sunset to sunrise. right. but you can trade... from, from... from darkness to light. ♪ you're not gonna say it are you? ♪ that's gillette clear gel. it goes on clear and keeps you fresh all day. and it doesn't leave white marks on your shirt. gillette clear gel antiperspirant.
hebreakfast makers, takers, step counters, outdoor explorers, faith restorers, appointment keepers, fantastic creatures. farmer's market goers, cholesterol lowerers cell phone silencers. the new lease on lifers, and the positive thinkers. here's to you all that see every day as an opportunity to thrive your way.
chris con coons is known fos bipartisan, good faith cle relationship with his colleagues. that made it that more striking to see the hot fire which he responded that the president fired attorney general jeff sessions and installed a white house loyalist named matt whittaker to take over the operations of the justice department and the mueller
investigation specifically. he responded online, if there's any indication that the president has fired the attorney general and named mr. whittaker as acting attorney general to influence or end special counsel robert mueller's investigation, that would make today's action an historic attack on the rule of law. that is a red line, which president trump has been warned not to cross by republicans and democrats alike. joining us now is senator chris coons, thank you for making time to join us tonight, sir. >> thank you, rachel. >> you called this action by the president today a red line if this appointment was made in order to influence or end the special counsel's investigation. can you tell me what you mean by that? >> that's right. if he forced out attorney general jeff sessions and replaced him not with rod rosenstein, the deputy attorney general, but instead with a loyalist, matthew whittaker, in order to have acting attorney
general whittaker squeeze or end the investigation by robert mueller, that would be an obstruction of justice action. there have been strong words by senators, republican and democrat, for months, cautioning president trump against interfering with the mueller investigation. many senators have said if the president is innocent, it's in his best interest to have this investigation go all the way to its conclusion. there were some more statements today by a senator-elect mitt romney, senator alexander, by senator susan collins, by many democrats, as well, saying the president should not interfere. but if, as your previous guest indicated, there's a step taken to curtail the reach or the funding or support of the mueller investigation, that would be a decisive moment, and we would need to match these words with action. i'm calling on the nat senate t take up and pass the bipartisan bill i introduced last year, with the three other senators.
it's already passed the senate judiciary committee by a strong bipartisan vote of 14-7. it's ready for action on the floor. and this strikes me as the sort of moment that should precipitate bipartisan action in the senate. >> the kind of worry that you're describing there, that action should be taken to stop the mueller investigation, how would you know if that had happened? one of the things that has become a hallmark of this investigation is that the special counsel's office is incredibly tight lipped. we know them by their public actions and not by their words. if there was action taken, even today already within the justice department, to kybosh some element of the investigation, how would we know? >> that's part of my concern here, rachel, is we don't have any direct way to know that. we would only find out about it if there were people directly connected with the mueller probe who allowed that to be shared.
and as you mentioned, they've been extraordinarily tight lipped and have controlled information from getting outside that probe. rob is a decorated combat veteran, a life long republican, a by the book federal law enforcement leader. he's run a tight ship with no leaks. so we might not know, and we might not be able to act in time to defend that investigation. i'll just remind you, the only reason we're having this conversation is because president trump fired fbi director jim comey, and then went on television and said he did so in order to stop the russia probe. that's what led to the appointment of a special counsel. it was broadly supported in a bipartisan way last year. this is likely going to be the kind of moment when we have to put up or shut up, and it's going to call for actions by senators of both parties. >> if mr. whittaker has been
told or is advised by lawyers at the justice department that he cannot oversee this investigation, his public statements criticizing the investigation, if he defies that advice or if he received that advice and ignored it, does the judiciary committee have any way to correct that? >> not that i'm aware of. we could certainly call acting attorney general whittaker in front of the judiciary committee. i think he should appear in front of us to answer questions about his intentions with regard to the mueller probe and other issues. we have an oversight responsibility where there's a new acting attorney general. i think it would be completely appropriate for chairman grassley to invite him to come of and answer some of these questions. but in the minority, democrats on the committee can't compel him to come and testify. we can simply press the issue. one of my concerns here is that as we move into the next congress, our margin in the
senate may get worse. we've lost probably two seats, maybe three in the senate in terms of the democrat/republican balance. that may affect our ability to bring together a bipartisan group that will compel action even further. >> senator chris coons of delaware, sir, thank you. i know it's a very busy time. thanks for being with us tonight. as i mentioned, tomorrow, a lot of groups across the country who have been preparing for this moment are calling for protests across the country. more than 900 are planned, they're for 5:00 local time thursday, tomorrow afternoon. it remains to be seen how many people will turn out for those. the question is whether or not this was the break glass moment, groups two have been organizing for this say that it is. it will be interesting to see how many people turn out tomorrow to try to protect the mueller investigation. we'll be right back. just got mya results: 74% italian. and i found out that i'm from the big toe of that sexy italian boot!
i'm awake. but it was pretty nifty when jen showed me how easy it was to protect our home and auto with progressive. [ wrapper crinkling ] get this butterscotch out of here. progressive can't protect you from becoming your parents. there's quite a bit of work, 'cause this was all -- this was all stapled. but we can protect your home and auto when you bundle with us. lauren underwood grew up in
naperville, illinois. she grew up with a heart condition, which made her want to become a nurse. she became a nurse, ended up taking her nursing experience to the obama worked at the health and human services department helping to implement the affordable care act. back in illinois her congressman voted to repeal the affordable care act. and that's when things started to change in lauren underwood's life. >> good morning, everyone. it's lauren underwood, we were here. i'm reminding you to vote. my license is a nurse. i'm working to expand health care coverage in communities across the country. i was faced with this america on tv that didn't anything like what i knew. in a district that's never elected a woman being a young millennial woman of color, it's certainly a lot for some people. no one invited us to this table.
>> i'm so proud of you. >> no one. and i think that's also what makes it so powerful. >> after the 2016 presidential election with her hometown congressman voting to get rid of the affordable care act, lauren underwood decided she would run for congress. 32 years old, she's never run for anything. she's from the 14th district in illinois, which is solid red part of the state, so trump district. 86% of that district is white. voters there have never sent a person of color there to congress, they've never sent a woman either. by all accounts lauren underwood was a pipe dream to fill that seat held by a republican who had voted to take away her health care. until she wasn't. last night lauren underwood won. she turfed out a four-time republican congressman 20 years her senior in a race everyone told her she would lose. today the chicago sun times put her photo on the front page right next to this head hine, house flippers.
she's not a dolphin, he's a congresswoman elect. congratulations ms. underwood. thank you so much for being with us. >> thank you, rachel. i'm so honored to be on. >> one of the reasons i wanted to talk to you tonight is because i learned today after you won that you beat six men in the primaries to get this spot on the ballot. >> i did. and in that primary election we had a field of seven. i got 57% of the vote in that primary, which was pretty unprecedented. and went onto win the general election last night against the congressman. >> what is the secret of your success to winning that primary, winning a trump district, unseating a four time incumbent? to what do you attribute this? >> when we launched this campaign, this was a seat that was formerly held by the u.s. speaker of the house dennis
hasker, and a democrat succeeded him, but it had been some time since there was real grass roots democratic involvement whereby training and an opportunity for a candidate to travel to the world and suburban parts of the community and really build and mobilize a campaign that could be as successful. and we said we were going to go to even the most rufl parral pa the district that maybe hadn't been touched by a democrat in ten years. we heard farmers tell us no democrat had knocked on their door in that time frame. and we showed up and showed up in those living rooms, in those fields and to in those cul-de-sacs to engage our neighbors. >> you're 32 now, you're going to be one of the youngest people elected to congress. and as an african-american and as a woman that had to be such a steep climb.
it's 86% white district, you're running as a first time candidate, as a woman, a young woman, as an african-american woman. i wanted to know whether or not that was daunting for you, a factor for you in terms of your confidence and in your game plan? >> well, this is my community, my home. my family moves when i was 3 years old. so this is community that taught me to a black woman in the world. it never crossed my mind i was somehow not a good fit or unqualified to seek the seat for this position. i stepped forward. and with the help of so many women in our district we were able to do what so many folks had never imagined would be possible. and i'm really proud that our election day was 50 years and one day after surely tizzism became the first black woman to be elected to the congress. and i will be the youngest black woman ever to serve in the united states congress. >> what are your priorities when you get there? do you have a dream in terms of
committees and legislation to work on? obviously you're getting there as part of a new democratic majority. there's no democratic majority in the senate to work as a partner. but there will be democratic control of those committees and you're coming in as a star. >> thank you. well, i am really focused on health care. it has emerged as the number one issue in the election across my community because premium prices are high, prescription drug prices are high and so many people across illinois are feeling squeezed. as a nurse i know how important it is to protect pre-existing conditions. i also have a pre-existing condition myself. so this health care agenda, lowering prices and including real mental health care reform are things i want to immediately begin tackling. >> illinois congresswoman elect lauren underwood, it's such a pleasure to have you here. it was a joy to follow your campaign from across the country, and good luck to you. please keep us surprised. stay in touch, we'd love to see how this goes for you. >> thank you, rachel.
>> all right, thanks. stay with us. >> teacher: let's turn in your science papers. >> tech vo: this teacher always puts her students first. >> student: i did mine on volcanoes. >> teacher: you did?! oh, i can't wait to read it. >> tech vo: so when she had auto glass damage... she chose safelite. with safelite, she could see exactly when we'd be there. >> teacher: you must be pascal. >> tech: yes ma'am. >> tech vo: saving her time... [honk, honk] >> kids: bye! >> tech vo: ...so she can save the science project. >> kids: whoa! >> kids vo: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace ♪
i am a techie dad.n. i believe the best technology should feel effortless. like magic. at comcast, it's my job to develop, apps and tools that simplify your experience. my name is mike, i'm in product development at comcast. we're working to make things simple, easy and awesome. one more piece of breaking election news tonight. what appears poised to be another republican to democratic flip in the house. and this is a weird one. just check this out. just in the last hour the new mexico secretary of state adjusted the vote count in a race we had previously thought was decided. now, this was the second district of new mexico, a seat left open when republican steve pierce left it to run for governor of new mexico last
night. he lost. the reason i say this is weird one because last night the republican in this race yvette herrell she was the projected winner in this. the democrat in the race, she didn't concede. she said she was waiting on votes that hadn't yet been counted. well, sure enough of the right now the local station kob is reporting the votes have been turned. apparently there's still another 100 ballots that need to be hand counted plus another 1,000 provisional ballots to be tallied. but as it stands right now with the addition of those 8,000 ballots nobody knew about last night it kind of looks like a republican hasn't won in new mexico at all. that in fact small as a 3,000 vote