Skip to main content

tv   All In With Chris Hayes  MSNBC  November 13, 2019 12:00am-1:00am PST

12:00 am
broadcast to turn to each night for a review of that day's testimony along with smart analysis. so for this night, that's our broadcast on a tuesday evening. thank you so much for being here with us and good night from nbc news headquarters here in new york. tonight on "all in," the eve of the first public impeachment hearing into president trump and ukraine. >> the president abused his power, and this is coming from the mouth of patriotic diplomats. >> tonight, what to expect tomorrow. just >> we've got some lawless people in some very high positions. they're lawless. >> then john bolton spills the beans on what he thinks motivates trump's foreign policy. >> john wasn't in line with what we were doing. >> plus the bipartisan push to prevent an execution in texas and new testimony from a former
12:01 am
trump campaign official seems to contradict the president on wikileaks. >> i know nothing about wikileaks. it's not my thing. >> when "all in" starts right now. good evening from chicago. i'm chris hayes. and we are now less than 14 hours away from public impeachment hearings of the president of the united states for just the fourth time in all of american history. those hearings will be broadcast live across every major broadcast and cable news network for americans to watch. that coverage starts right here on msnbc at 9:00 in the morning. but even before the hearings we have known from the get-go, from the very first piece of publicly released evidence, the notes of president trump's call with the president of ukraine, the president tried to coerce the leader of a foreign occupied country to manufacture dirt on a political opponent. the ukrainian president told president trump he was ready to buy more american weapons he responded infamously, quote, i
12:02 am
would like you to do us a favor, though. he then brought up joe biden and his son and said, quote, a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do. we have learned from dozens and dozens of hours of closed door congressional testimony that trump's phone call was just one moment in a far reaching operation involving the president's personal lawyer, rudy giuliani, two giuliani associates who have since been indicted partially for their role in the scheme. white house chief of staff mick mulvaney, the attorney general, the secretary of energy, the secretary of state, the vice president of the united states, and of course president trump himself. tomorrow two opening witnesses are expected to describe the scope of the scheme to extort ukraine. that includes bill taylor who was the acting u.s. ambassador of ukraine at this very moment. west point grad who was awarded the bronze star for service in vietnam. he's a career diplomat and worked in republican and democratic administrations since all the way back in 1985. he served in afghanistan shortly
12:03 am
after the u.s. invaded that country. he oversaw reconstruction in iraq. he previously served once before as the u.s. ambassador to ukraine under george w. bush. last month taylor testified behind closed doors he was reluctant to go back to kiev because of what he had heard regarding the role of giuliani. taylor also wrote the text that created a contemporaneous record of trump's attempts to extort ukraine. quote, are we now saying that security assistance and a white house meeting are conditioned on investigations, and i think it's crazy to withhold security assistance for help with a political campaign. taylor also told congress he believes the origin of the idea to extort the ukrainian president came from rudy giuliani to benefit president trump. taylor will be joined at the witness table by deputy assistant secretary of state george kent. kent also a career diplomat has
12:04 am
been part oosthuizen foreif thee for almost 30 years. he currently right now oversees state department policy towards ukraine. kent testified extensively about rudy giuliani's role in the scheme in his deposition telling congress, quote, mr. giuliani had been carrying on a campaign for several months full of lies and incorrect information. the was clear the former mayor had influence on the president in terms of the way the president thought of ukraine. two men will be appearing before the 22-member house intelligence committee in the same room where hillary clinton testified before the benghazi committee. before any of the committee members will be allowed to ask questions committee chair adam schiff along with the majority's attorney daniel goldman will get 45 minutes to question taylor and kent. and the minorities attorneys steve caster. he prosecuted organized crime syndicates and also a former msnbc contributor and has appeared on this very show a
12:05 am
whole bunch of times. republican attorney steve caster spent 14 years as a lawyer for republicans on the house oversight committee. during the obama administration he was part of the benghazi investigations and the probe into the justice department's operation fast and furious. we will get to see them both tomorrow in the highest profile presentation evidence we've had so far. it seems worth as we prepare for this pointing something out that's obvious but can get easily lost in the day to day of the news cycle. impeaching a president is a big deal. the spectacle is likely to be compelling but it's also a really true grave undertaking. it's not wrong when critics talk about how serious it is to attempt to remove a president who was elected. and it does not speak well for the state of our country we have come to a point where this process seems so urgently exceedingly necessary. i want to bring in one of the congressmen who will be
12:06 am
questioning the witnesses in tomorrow's hearing. congressman sean patrick maloney. congressman, it's good to have you. how are you preparing for tomorrow? >> well, you know, we are big believers in preparation, so i'm reviewing the testimony of the key witnesses, making sure i'm up to speed on what ambassador taylor testified to the first time. and -- but, you know, really, chris, the important thing tomorrow is not any of us on the dais, it's not the staff. the important thing tomorrow is this witness. it is all of these witnesses and their story and their evidence and facts. and what i hope for tomorrow is that all of us get out of the way, and that respectfully includes all of you folks in the media. and we let these dedicated public servants, a guy like bill taylor, you know, 40 years in the foreign service, vietnam veteran, served as an infantry officer with the 101st infantry division in vietnam, west point
12:07 am
graduate, highly credible, experience, knowledgeable public servant appointed by a republican president. let him tell his story. let him tell everything he knows and let the public see it unfiltered. and so i think the best preparation in some ways is going to be to exercise some restraint and let these witnesses tell the story. >> restraint can be difficult for members of congress who are given to talking, no shade there. i am, too. i'm a cable news host. but you will have these staff attorneys asking questions, which is a sort of break from normal procedure, i think it's fair to say. take me through why that is the choice that's been made and why you think that's important and can help the witnesses tell their story. >> well, because of what i just said. because these witnesses really have an important story to tell. and it's not a happy story. it's a sad sad story of the abuse of power at the highest levels of the united states government. it should break peoples heart
12:08 am
that this president, any american president would engage in this kind of shabby and seedy conduct for his own grimy political objectives. and what the staff can do is in a disciplined extended way guide the witness through the testimony that they have to share, and really, again, let the witness speak and do so over an extended period of time of 45 minutes or so so it doesn't get all chopped up in five-minute bunches, and the whole goal at least in my mind is to let this witness explain to the american public what they know and let the public judge for themselves. >> you know, after the full mueller report or at least the sort of redacted version of the mueller report was released, there was a split in the democratic party caucus, in the house about impeachment, about whether what was recounted in that mueller report or maybe some other things the president had done in terms of profiting
12:09 am
from the presidency necessitated a formal impeachment inquiry or not. you i believe were on the show saying you you wanted to take it slow, you were not convinced. obviously you've changed. take me through where you were six months ago and where you are now. >> well, you know, actually my position was he deserved it. the question was whether tactically the best way to hold him accountable was to put the country through an impeachment process that was going to be based on a report by a special counsel who found no provable criminal conspiracy, though a ton of evidence of obstruction of justice, or whether balancing the equities it was better to leave that one to the voters and to hold the president accountable through the election, through continued oversight, through criminal liability late down the road, but, you know, this is a totally new ball game. this has nothing to do in the most basic sense with the mueller probe at all. it's not a change. it's an evaluation of a new set of facts that are stark, that are extremely damaging to the president, that paint an
12:10 am
unmistakable picture of abuse of authority that violates our national security. and what the president did here cannot be okay. it cannot be okay for this president, any president to go out and extort the assistance of a foreign leader for an advantage in an american political election. we let that happen and we set a devastating precedent, and an election itself won't even cure it in some sense. the congress has to take a stand. this is precisely bribery, foreign interference in the american system, it's precisely the kind of offense the founders contemplated when they drafted the impeachment provisions into the constitution. this is the way to hold the president accountable under these facts. >> all right. congressman sean patrick maloney, member of the house intelligence committee, which is holding the first public impeachment hearing tomorrow. thank you so much for taking a little time tonight. >> my pleasure. >> joining me now is a former federal prosecutor for the southern district of new york where she worked side by side
12:11 am
with daniel goldman, the attorney that will lead the questioning for house democrats tomorrow. and also joining me jill wine-banks. a former assistant watergate special prosecutor and an mean legal analyst. tanya, let me start with you. as someone who worked alongside daniel goldman. i know him a bit from his appearances on my show. how do you think somebody like him approaches this role which is sort of a new one? it is not a court of law. it is the united states congress, but it is hearing or trial-like. >> yeah, it is certainly a new role, but it's one that he'll be comfortable with. there is good reason why chairman schiff brought in a seasoned veteran prosecutor, and danny goldman, i think, is among the best of the bunch. he's going to be direct. he's going to be focused. as congressman maloney said, he's going to make it about the witness. he's going to -- but he will
12:12 am
direct the witness -- i don't want to say he'll lead the witness, but he'll allow the witness and the witnesses to tell their stories in a shape and in a form that makes sense, that is impactful, that has emotional appeal, and that is unburdened by distraction or irrelevant detail. so i think he's a great pick for this, and i think he will allow the stories to be told. >> jill, i saw some reporting about -- there's some polling about how democrats and donald trump are handling impeachment, and democrats are -- 52% say they're bad at handling impeachment, 48% good, the numbers worse for president trump. it strikes me here that there's an asymmetry which is that democrats want this to be grave and serious and focused and republicans want people to come away concluding this is circus, this is crazy and they may have the wherewithal to do that. where do you see the control of the flow of the day going tomorrow? >> i fear that the republicans will do as you suggested, which
12:13 am
is try to make this a circus. i hope that americans will see that for what it is, which is a diversion from what the facts are and a diversion from what they should be hearing. i cannot but imagine that the questions asked will be very limited and that the answers will be where the focus is. we know already from what we've heard about the testimony behind closed doors that there is a very compelling story line. and i think that's what we need to focus on is that the story needs to be told. the best thing that's happened is getting rid of the five-minute rule which was a real impediment to america hearing a narrative. this way you can ask the question and let the witness tell the story and let us know who and what and when and why and how they felt about it. and that we can understand the
12:14 am
danger that was posed in their minds to what the president was doing, a danger to our national security that really threatens democracy, and that's why tomorrow is so important. and i hope everyone will tune in and listen. >> tanya, one thing that's interesting here, and this i think relates to what is kind of courtroom and trial practice, these are all folks who have given extensive testimony already. they've already given sworn testimony. some of that has been -- a lot of that has been released. what is that sort of approach for someone who is in danny goldman's role where you have this testimony before him and what you're trying to do with it when you're now in this public setting? >> look, he and the other questioners have laid the groundwork here. they have set the foundation. they have asked all the painstaking methodical questions of the witnesses, they've established the facts. and there's thousands of pages of transcripts as you've said. their task tomorrow is to
12:15 am
whittle it down, to pare down the important facts and to make sure that those get out and they are told in a linear and impactful way. and so they have done a lot of the work. and then tomorrow will be the presentation. it's said that you can lose a jury in 20 minutes. and hopefully the american public will have longer attention span than that, but the narrative does need to come out quickly. and so rather than i think a lot of the questioning that we saw that was sort of -- you know, had to establish this fact and that fact and go along in a particular way tomorrow i think we can probably expect some right out of the box, you know, some hard-hitting questions that go right to it, that capture the attention and that, you know, will also tell the story but will tell it in a more attention grabbing way.
12:16 am
>> jill, there's just in the last ten minutes i think the house intelligence committee has released a witness schedule past this week. it's going to be marie yovanovitch on friday and then jennifer williams, alexander vindman, curt volker and tim morrison next week along with gordon sondland, david cooper, gordon hale, russia's deputy fiona hill. it sounds like three of those witnesses i believe were requested by the minority and granted. that's quite a bit of testimony we're going to get over the next week and half. >> it is a lot, but if handled properly let's look at what happens in any trial, in an organized trial case. which this very much resembles, i'm afraid to say. whoever thought my organized crime will be as relevant as my watergate experience, but it is. and i think it's not that hard for a jury to stay focused on what the questions are and what the answer are.
12:17 am
and so far from what you've read of the summary of witnesses, it's very clear what the story is how the pieces of the puzzle fit together. and so what i think will happen is the the democrats are going to put forward each part of the bricks, you know, brick one that says this is the fact. and then the second witness who corroborates one of those facts and a third witness who corroborates. and all together you're going to see a very impenetrable story line that's going to be very hard for the republicans to undo, and they just have to pay attention to the facts and stop the nonsense with things like taking over the scif. >> da nya perry and jill wine-banks, thank you both for sharing your expertise tonight. >> thanks, chris. coming up john bolton is yet to testify before the house, but it appears he'll tell you just about anything you want to know if you're paying the right price. carol lee joins us with an exclusive in just two minutes.
12:18 am
it's time for the veterans day sale on the sleep number 360 smart bed. can it help keep us asleep? yes, it senses your movements and automatically adjusts to keep you both comfortable. don't miss the final days to save $1,000 on the new sleep number 360 special edition smart bed, now only $1,799. ends sunday.
12:19 am
former national security
12:20 am
advisor john bolton has been playing an interesting game with regard to the impeachment inquiry. his deputies and people loyal to him, associated with him have testified before the committee including former national security senior director fiona hill who offered bolton's damning assessment of the entire ukraine scheme, including the legendary phrase that he did not want to be part of, quote, whatever drug deal u.s. ambassador eu gordon sondland and white house chief of staff mick mulvaney are cooking up on this. but bolton was a no-show last week for a deposition before the impeachment committee itself. one of his former deputies went to court to get a ruling on whether or not he can testify. bolton says he's willing to testify if the court clears the way in that case. just last week bolton's own lawyer teased he has a story to tell. saying bolton was, quote, personally involved in many of the meetings, events and conversations at the part of the house impeachment inquiry as well as the many relevant meetings and conversations that
12:21 am
had not yet been discussed. but what john bolton does seem focused on is making sure he can turn that information into money. he landed a book deal reportedly worth $2 million and he went down to miami to give a private speech to some important investment bankers and had some -- to exclusive reporting by my colleagues carol lee and stephanie ruhle. set the scene here. what was the context in which bolton was talking to this crew? >> so he was talking to a bunch of hedge fund managers. it was a morgan stanley event in miami last wednesday night, and he was basically the keynote speaker. and what he was told is this is off-the-record, those were the ground rules and we want you to be canal to speak candidly and bolton did. and he said a number of things that even people that were in attendance of his speech said they found surprising. there was some shock in the room particularly when bolton mentioned president trump's son-in-law jared kushner and daughter ivanka in a somewhat
12:22 am
disparaging way to basically say, you know, if trump were to win another term that they would try to get him to recast his legacy in a way that makes him tilt towards the liberal end of the spectrum, specifically he said according to people in the room that they would convince him to nominate a liberal like lawrence tribe to the supreme court. and it was described as him kind of talking about them with an eye rolling kind of way. meaning, it suggests that he didn't think much of them and their positions in the white house. >> i mean, i don't think that's a very good prediction on the part of mr. bolton, but he was working in the white house. what i found really striking was his characterization of the president's record particularly as it relates to turkey. i mean he had -- turkey is one of these sort of foreign policy areas where the president has done a lot of things that are incredibly amenable to turkey strong man
12:23 am
recep erdogan who is coming tomorrow. he obviously gave him the green light for that invasion of north eastern syria. what did he have to say about the turkey relationship? >> so what he said, chris, was that, you know, basically he suggested that there's some sort -- something else driving the president's policy towards turkey. he said turkey was the most frustrating thing that trump would do in terms of policymaking. and, you know, that comes amid a lot of frustrations john bolton had. let's not forget he was vehemently opposed to the president sitting down and doing diplomacy with kim jong-un, the leader of north korea. and so what bolton suggested is that perhaps there is some business or personal motivation behind the way the president has approached turkey, and that's a striking comment obviously for a former national security adviser to say. >> i want to read from the piece. bolton says he believes there's a personal or business
12:24 am
relationship as you just said dictating trump's position on turkey because none of his advisers are aligned with him on the issue. this comes the same day we have this reporting from "the new york times" all the back channels this white house has with turkey including with a person trump essentially was in business with, who's been tasked by the erdogan government as one of the main points of contact, who throws conferences at the trump hotel and then gets invited to the oval office to work the president over on sanctions. >> there's this question about the trump administration and turkey -- look, every administration that's had to deal with president erdogan has struggled. that's a fact in terms of the policy. >> yep. >> but this administration particularly has had a cloud over it really from the start when the comes to turkey. if you'll remember michael flynn, the first national security advisor of president trump's, you know, he was doing some lobbying on behalf of turkey, he had taken actions designed to benefit the turkish government. and so there's been a swirl of
12:25 am
sort of questions about the relationship between the trump white house and turkey. and it's hard to know because the policy issues and turkey is such a difficult ally to navigate given its strategic position. it's hard to know where president trump's decisions are aligned in terms of just that his views are aligned with erdogan and he wants to get out of syria, for instance, and erdogan is offering him a solution and he's ready to take it or if there's something more nefarious there. >> all right. carol lee, great reporting. thank you so much. >> thanks, chris. >> still ahead the hits keep on coming from the roger stone trial. testimony today that indicates president trump may have lied to robert mueller. that's next. my parents never taught me anything about managing money.
12:26 am
12:27 am
the amount of student loan debt i have, i'm embarrassed to even say. we just decided we didn't want debt any longer. ♪ i didn't realize how easy investing could be. i'm picking companies that i believe in. ♪ i think sofi money is amazing. ♪
12:28 am
thank you sofi. sofi thank you, we love you. ♪ in the human brain, billions of nefor people with parkinson's, some neurons change their tune, causing uncontrollable tremors. now, abbott technology can target those exact neurons. restoring control and harmony, once thought to belost forever. the most personal technology is technology with the power to change your life.
12:29 am
testimony wrapped up today in the trial of roger stone, the president's longtime associate and political adviser. stone is charged with lying to congress about his conversations with wikileaks as well as witness tampering and obstruction of a congressional proceeding. you'll recall, of course, that wikileaks is the organization that published the democratic campaign emails that were stolen by the russians during the 2016 presidential election and were then exploited by the trump campaign. according to an indictment from special counsel robert mueller stone effectively acted as a liaison between stone and the trump campaign.
12:30 am
responses to mueller trump claimed he had no memory of ever talking to roger stone about wikileaks. in his written responses to mueller, trump claimed he had no memory of ever talking to roger stone about wikileaks and the emails hacked in the election. quote, i spoke to roger stone from time to time during the campaign. i do not recall discussing wikileaks with him. nor do i recall being aware mr. stone having discussed wikileaks with individuals associated with my campaign. today brought some amazing testimony from trump's own deputy campaign manager rick gates who told a very different story than the one trump told in his written testimony. joining me now is dan freedman a reporter from mother jones who has been covering stone's trial and was in the courtroom today. his news piece was headlined stone trial reveals trump likely lied to mueller. the gaetz testimony today was sort of the big jaw drop moment. dan, what happened? he was of course a senior adviser to the trump campaign, a
12:31 am
senior aide. he said on july 31st he was in a car with trump and heard trump on the phone and when trump got off that phone call he had wikileaks which had just released a bunch of national emails that disrupted the democratic national convention, trump told gates 2/3 be more information released from wikileaks. of course that means trump was talking to stone about wikileaks and what emails wikileaks would be releasing. we don't know for sure that what trump remembered or didn't recall when he answered those written questions to mueller. >> right. >> but, you know, it's -- we can use our faculties and it really looks like he lied in that written answer to mueller, which is pretty astonishing. >> yeah, i mean, there's a reason that people who have lawyers and are careful say i do not recall a lot when they're on a sworn deposition and trump, actually, we know is familiar with depositions and he says "i do not recall" a lot. but clearly this moment was
12:32 am
striking enough to gates that he both recalls it and tells investigators and now the jury. >> yeah. it was sort of a dramatic reveal in gates' testimony and wasn't the only one. gates also said just before that pal manafort, the chairman of the campaign asked gates to keep in touch with stone and manafort told gates he was briefing trump on what he was learning about wikileaks. so there's a bunch of evidence that shows that trump despite what he says knew a lot about what wikileaks was doing, and that their entire campaign was paying close attention to what stone was saying. >> so here's the question -- the mystery at the heart of this for me. it does seem like what i've seen in the testimony that stone's in some trouble, in the case that he actually lied to the congressional testimony, that he tried to obstruct this investigation. but what doesn't seem clear is the mystery of did stone have some actual secret knowledge? did he have some back door? was he just a bs artist who is
12:33 am
so addicted to bsing that he's now going to go to jail for it? >> the really interesting thing about this case, chris, is it's really not going to solve that question. the mueller report had all this redacted stuff about stone, but this is narrow case. it's about stone as you mentioned lying to congress primarily. so they're not revealing a lot of information. we know that stone was telling the campaign he had information about what wikileaks knew, and he came out today also according to gates he was saying wikileaks was going to be releasing emails damaging to hillary clinton as early as april. so it's revealed that stone had some damaging evidence but we don't know what it is. >> that is big question mark that hangs over this whole trial. dan freeman, thank you for your time tonight. >> thank you. >> coming up, there's padding your résume and then there's padding your résume. the amazing story of the trump official who was definitely not on the cover of "time "magazine. that's next. health markets compares your current plan with
12:34 am
thousands of options nationwide from national insurance companies. don't miss the deadline. there are only days remaining in open enrollment. funny thing about health insurance, you don't think about how much you need it until you need it. he's not going to be okay. with so many changes to health insurance plans, are you still sure you have the right fit? having the wrong fit can cost you thousands. new plans are available that can save you money. that's why i love healthmarkets, your insurance marketplace. they guarantee you won't find a lower price anywhere for the plans they offer. their new fitscore instantly compares thousands of plans, both on the government exchange and off, to find the one that best fits your insurance need. call or visit healthmarkets to find your fitscore today. in minutes, you can find out if your current plan is the right fit or if there's another one that can get you extra coverage or help save you money. best of all, their service is completely free. their new fitscore makes it easy to compare your plan to new ones that could lower your costs
12:35 am
and save you money. try the new fitscore today. you may even qualify for free health insurance with no monthly premium. don't get stuck using the government exchange either. healthmarkets can find you the right health plan and make sure you get all the subsidies you deserve without all the hassle. they even have new alternative options most don't even know about that can save you thousands. they work to help you and do it all for free. don't assume that your plan is still the right fit. the healthmarkets' fitscore makes it easy to find the right plan for you. having helped enroll people in millions of policies with an a+ customer satisfaction rating, you can trust healthmarkets. for this free service, go to or call right now. your insurance market place, healthmarkets. call healthmarkets before the december 15th enrollment deadline to see if you qualify for $0 premiums. call the number on your screen now.
12:36 am
12:37 am
allow me to introduce you to mina chang, she's a deputy assistant secretary in the state department where he earns a six figure salary for her work helping to prevent conflicts in politically unstable countries. important and serious work. it's a senior post, one that usually requires a top secret security clearance. chang was originally being considered for an even more senior job, overseeing the u.s. agency for international developments work in asia with a
12:38 am
budget of over $1 billion. back in september her nomination for that position was just abruptly withdrawn without explangts ae explanation and now i think we know why. an nbc news investigation reveals chang embellished her résume and made misleading claims about her professional background. this is her official bio on the state department website. it says chang has addressed the republican and democratic national conventions. but videos and documents reviewed by nbc news actually showed she spoke at separate events held in the cities of the philadelphia and cleveland during the same time of the conventions. her bio claims she addressed the united nations. no record of that. and chang claimed her group testified before congress. no record of that ever happening either. then there's her education. according to her bio, she's an alumni. but she didn't have a degree. she's also listed as a graduate
12:39 am
of the army corp knowledge security seminar, an event that lasted all of four days. as far as an undergraduate degree, her linkedin page mentions the universities of the nations. she touted the organization as working in dozens of countries and impacting thousands of people. but a review of their tax filing show no concrete information about overseas projects, just a handful of u.s.-based staff and a budget of less than $300,000. perhaps chang's most egregious moment came in 2017 when she showed up to interview with a fake "time" magazine cover featuring her face as an example of her work. but, i mean, honestly, can you blame her? her boss is donald trump, and she's just as qualified for her job as he is for the presidency. there's a company that's talked to even more real people
12:40 am
than me: jd power. 448,134 to be exact. they answered 410 questions in 8 categories about vehicle quality. and when they were done, chevy earned more j.d. power quality awards across cars, trucks and suvs than any other brand over the last four years. so on behalf of chevrolet, i want to say "thank you, real people." you're welcome. we're gonna need a bigger room.
12:41 am
they have businesses to grow customers to care for lives to get home to
12:42 am
they use print discounted postage for any letter any package any time right from your computer all the amazing services of the post office only cheaper get our special tv offer a 4-week trial plus postage and a digital scale go to and never go to the post office again!
12:43 am
rodney reed is scheduled to be executed by the state of texas next wednesday, but a growing chorus of people across the ideological and cultural spectrum are calling on governor greg abbott to step in and save the life of a man who many believe are innocent. celebrities like oprah, rihanna and beyonce are all calling for a halt of reed's execution. a group of texas law enforcement officers filed a brief asking the u.s. supreme court to intervene. state lawmakers, very polarized state of texas, both democrat and republican, have written to the governor about the case. even republican senator ted cruz is calling for the state to stop
12:44 am
and take a harder look at the evidence. we've been covering the rodney reed case for years. ever since his last scheduled execution back in early 2015. even back then there were serious issues surrounding his conviction. in 1998 rodney reed was convicted of the murder and rape of 19-year-old stacey stites, a crime he says he did not commit. i traveled to the prison in livingston, texas, where reed was being held weeks before his scheduled execution in 2015. by then he had spent nearly half his life behind bars. >> i had nothing to do with this case. >> you did not kill stacey stites? >> i had nothing to do with this case. nothing at all. absolutely nothing at all. >> stacey was found dead on the side of a country road in the small town of texas in april 1996. a medical examiner ruled she'd died as a result of asphyxia due
12:45 am
to leg tour strangulation associated with sexual assault. and a dna sample was obtained from semen found inside the body. investigators initially suspected stites's fiance, a police officer in a neighboring town. finel was the last person to see her alive at the night of her death and his truck was found down the road from stites' body. finel said she was driving to work to a super market as she normally did. finel was eventually cleared when the dna was not a match, and investigators concluded he couldn't have killed her based on the timeline he provided. a year later police looked into a man with multiple accusations of sexual assault, rodney reed. the dna was a match. they brought him in for questioning. >> the girl is stacey stites.
12:46 am
have you ever seen her before? >> no, i haven't. >> never dated her? >> no, i haven't. >> after first denying knowing the victim reed later said he and stites were engaged in a secret sexual relationship which would explain the presence of his dna. his lawyer said they found witnesses who knew about his relationship with stacey stites but could not bring anyone forward in trial. i asked reed why he initially told investigators why he didn't know stites. >> i didn't want to try to incriminate myself. i didn't want to be questioned about it. i was a black man in a small town and it wasn't me pulling the race card or anything like that. it's not nothing about that, but the nature of this is a small city that i lived in, you know what i'm saying? >> it took just hours for an all white jury to convict rodney reed and sentence him to death. >> when you found out you were getting the death penalty, did it feel real to you, did it feel distant? >> it was a numb feeling.
12:47 am
it was a numb feeling. it was like, you know -- really it was unbelievable. it felt like i was in a dream. it felt like this wasn't real, it wasn't real. this can't be happening. >> ten years after reed was convicted, another trial brought his case back into the headlines. jimmy finell, stacey stites' fiance when she died pled guilty to kidnapping and improper sexual activity with a woman in his custody while he was on duty as a police officer. when you hear about his plea years later, what went through your mind then? >> we had no idea what jimmy finell was capable of back in '98. and i wonder what a jury would have done if they had known about that at the time. it makes you think a lot harder about whether jimmy finell could have done it.
12:48 am
tonight just over a week before rodney reed is once again scheduled to be executed by the state of texas, there's even more significant new evidence that casts further doubt on his conviction. the latest reporting on that next. don't go anywhere.
12:49 am
12:50 am
12:51 am
in eight days the state of texas plans to execute rodney reed for a crime he says he did not commit. tonight the innocence project which has helped exonerate more than 200 wrongfully convicted people through dna testing says they have compelling new evidence that casts doubt on reed's conviction. and they're battling it out in the courts while rodney reed's family fights to keep him alive. jermaine lee has the latest on the case. >> free rodney reed. >> free rodney reed. >> i believe we have a very good chance of getting justice not just for rodney but for stacey stites as well. because i know she is not resting well in the grave knowing that an innocent man is
12:52 am
going to be charged and murdered for a crime he didn't commit. >> reporter: when rodney reed was convicted 21 years ago of the rape and murder of stacey stites, the prosecution's entire case rested on two main pillars. first a time line provided by her fiance, jimmy finnell. second the traces of rodney reed's semen found in her body. reed was sentenced to death. he's now scheduled for execution november 20th. but reed's family and his legal team say he's innocent and that they have the compelling evidence and witnesses to prove it. every aspect of this case has been disproven and new evidence continues to come out. >> reporter: the innocent project took up rodney reed's case in 2012 and successfully won a stay of execution three years later. among the evidence they presented, new witnesses who said rodney reed and stacey stites were in a consensual,
12:53 am
albeit secret relationship. the legal team also poked holes in the prosecution's timeline. and now a new witness further muddies finnell's timeline. police officer curtis davis was with finnell after stacey stites went missing. >> what jimmy told curtis was very different to what he testified to at it trial or told the police. he claimed he'd been out late that night drinking and didn't get home until late and stacey must have left without him because he'd been drinking. whereas when he was at trial he testified that he had been at home with stacey the whole night. >> reporter: another new witness, a sheriff's deputy signed an affidavit saying he heard finnell at his fiancee's funeral standing over her body saying you got what you deserved. then there was the fact finnell later served a ten-year sentence
12:54 am
for kidnapping and improper sexual activity after a woman gave testimony saying he forced her to have sex at gunpoint while he was on duty as a police officer. and one of finnell's fellow inmates has now come forward saying he admitted killing stacey stites. >> new witnesses are coming forward with information that shows jimmy finnell may be the culprit here and that rodney reed did not commit this crime. >> an innocent man on death row. >> reporter: reed's legal team has filed an appeal in the u.s. supreme court and made a direct plea to the texas governor for clemency. a legion of supporters including police officers, state lawmakers, death penalty abolitionists and celebrities are also calling for rodney reed's exoneration. so far the governor has found no indication he'll grant clemency, but reed's family says he'll fight to the end. >> our family is now whole. injustice and corruption and racism has played a huge part in all of this. >> what was so polarizing about this case?
12:55 am
you have a black male who is convicted of sexually assaulting murdering a woman who's white who also is the fiance of a member of law enforcement. he was convicted right out the gate like in the court of public opinion. you know, like, he must have done it. >> what role does race continue to play in this case? you have texas justice is one thing, but texas justice for a black man in a small town, that's a whole different animal altogether. >> rodney's guilt is medically and scientifically impossible. we have credible witnesses about the relationship. we have mounting evidence pointing towards jimmy finnell. what's left to believe that rodney reed is actually guilty? to go forward with this execution, absent real evidence of guilt, you've got to wonder why would they do that? >> jimmy finnell's lawyer maintains that his client is
12:56 am
innocent and that it was rodney reed that killed stacey stites. "all in" reached out to the texas governor's office and the county district attorney and received now response. the texas attorney general office told nbc news that after reviews by more than 20 judges it's time, quote, to see that justice is done at last. i want to bring in trymaine lee for the latest. i understand lee's lawyers have appeals and motions filed pending seven legal tracts. >> they have appeals in state, federal and supreme court. including one in state court that seeks to invalidate the judge that signed the order trying to invalidate that order because the judge was temporary. if that order was granted he would get a new trial. there's a lot of pressure being put on governor greg abbott, but the only thing greg abbott can do unilaterally is give a 30-day reprieve. the state also requires a 90-day notice. which would essentially give rodney reed 120-day reprieve. now, the body that actually has all the power is board of
12:57 am
pardons and paroles. so they can make a decision and say, hey, we recommend you commute his lideath sentence to life sentence. at that point governor abbott can either accept or reject it. that's the only thing he can do. >> the thing that first drew us in was the conviction of jimmy finnell ten years after this guy is convicted by an all white jury in this town it turns out the fiance had sexually assaulted a woman in his custody. the new evidence here about police officers coming forward, i mean, please are sworn affidavits of things they say they're willing to testify to? >> there are multiple officers who come forward and give some variation of his implication of guilt including one guy who was at the viewing for stacey stites, standing in the doorway and he recalls seeing stacey stites body dressed in all white like a wedding dress and he hears him say you got what you deserved. he's a man of the law, a respected police officer who says he remembered hearing him say that. >> it's striking to me what ted
12:58 am
cruz said and there are republicans who have petitioned greg abbott. it's a very polarized state. it does seem like there's happening here a little bit. >> think about greg abbott was the law and order attorney general in this state and the state of texas executes more people than any other state in the country. and to have a bipartisan effort by all the ted cruzs of the world and all the pressure put on by entertainers and, you know, well-known people across the country. this is a little different. and still this is texas and texas justice is what it is. >> i know the stites family is divided in terms of how they feel about reed's guilt or innocence. >> that's right. there's a cousin of stacey stites around the time she was killed remembers hearing they were involved in this secret relationship. she believes rodney is innocent. but the mother and other siblings believe rodney reed is the killer and he's a rapist and it's time for him to be executed. >> it's a remarkable case. the deadline hoff the execution
12:59 am
is set for eight days from now, is that right? >> that's right, november 20th. at any moment, any day before then we could have any of those things trigger some sort of reprieve. there's no indication now greg abbott has any indication of offering that rebuke. >> thanks for the reporting on that case. thanks for joining me in chicago as well. the reason i'm here in chicago tonight is we're doing another live taping of our podcast tonight. mcarthur genius grant recipient who conceived the 1619 project for "the new york times" magazine. we're going to be talking about race and slavery all in the trump era. all very relevant to the conversation we just had. tickets are sold out tonight but i'll be talking to the legendary playwright tony kushner about politics and that's at the town hall in new york city december 8th. tickets are available at our went right now. they're not going to last
1:00 am
forever. there's also a brand new episode of with pod about her new book tracing 50 years of brave women, crucial court battles and a fascinating conversation. check it out where you get your podcasts. that is "all in" for this evening. "the 11th hour" with brian williams starts right now. the president wants his attorney general to say he's innocent as yet more damning testimony in id and fresh from being handed what he wanted from our president, the w leadser of turkey visits e people's house against the wishes of many lawmakers who still care about that sort of