tv All In With Chris Hayes MSNBC August 11, 2021 5:00pm-6:00pm PDT
we stood up, walked out to protect the freedom to vote. and now for a month, we've been in d.c. urging congress, urging the president to prioritize this issue and to pass federal voting rights legislation before it's too late. we can only hold the line so long in texas. we're the minority party. and we need congress to act now. >> well, thank you for all that you've done, texas state democrats are showing us how it's done. thank you, texas state representative gina hinojosa. that's tonight's "reidout." "all in" starts now. >> tonight on "all in" -- >> donald trump's pattern has been to use acolytes and sick fants whether in the white house or in the congress. >> the widening investigation into trump's effort to subvert democracy and the role his chief of staff played in it. >> mark meadows, everybody.
then just one day after the bipartisan infrastructure vote, republicans are back to their old obstructionist ways. >> republicans refusing to support anything on voting rights is not an excuse for democrats to do nothing. >> and as they cry freedom over masks and vaccines -- >> we don't have to accept the mandates. >> they do not respect your liberty. >> i trust them to know their circumstances better than government. >> what actual libertarian legal scholars say that's ridiculous. that's when "all in" starts right now. good evening from washington, dds d.c., i'm meddymeddyh -- me hassan. trump said i have long known and worked with mark and the relationship is a very good one. perhaps that's because the two of them have a lot in common.
both men made a fortune as real estate developers. a founding member of the ultra conservative freedom caucus, meadows, like trump, also hated obamacare and they both promoted the racist birther conspiracy theory which says barack obama was not born here in the united states. >> it's interesting when the more we find out, the more we realize how wrong the direction we're going. so what we're going to do is take back our country. 2012 is the time that we're going to send mr. obama home to kenya or wherever it is. we're going to do it. >> charming. and when it came to overturning a free and fair election in 2020, mark meadows signed up for that too. back in june "the new york times" reported that in trump's final weeks in office, meadows repeatedly pushed the justice department to investigate unfounded conspiracy theories about the 2020 presidential election, which included debunked claims of election fraud in new mexico and my personal favorite, a baseless
conspiracy, a bonkers conspiracy dubbed italy-gate, a fantastical theory that people in italy had used military technology an satellites to remotely tamper with voting machines in the united states and switch votes from trump to joe biden. but there's more. emails released by the house oversight committee show meadows pressed acting attorney general jeffrey rosen to investigate voter fraud in georgia, including one email sent january 1st that read, quote, there have been allegations of signature match anomalies in fulton county, georgia. can you get jeff clark to engage on this issue immediately to determine if there's any truth to this allegation? the very next day not only did mark meadows set up the infamous phone call in which trump would ask georgia secretary of state, brad raffensperger to find 11,780 votes. meadows was a willing participant in the call. >> mr. secretary, obviously there is -- there are
allegations where we believe that not every vote or fair vote and legal vote was counted, and that's at odds with the representation from the secretary of state's office. what i'm hopeful for, is there some way that we can -- we can find some kind of an agreement to look at this a little bit more fully? you know, the president mentioned fulton county. but in some of these areas where there seems to be a difference of where the facts seem to lead. and so, mr. secretary, i was hopeful that, you know, in the spirit of cooperation and compromise, is there something that we can at least have a discussion to look at some of these allegations to find a path forward that's less litigous? >> the day after "the washington
post" released that extraordinary phone call, bjay pak abruptly resigned. at the time we did not know why. now we do. today in testimony to the senate judiciary committee, pak said he quit because trump intended to fire him for his refusal to say that, to say that there was voter fraud. now it looks like the committee wants to talk to mark meadows yesterday. yesterday illinois senator dick durbin, the chairman of the senate judiciary committee, indicated that he would like the opportunity to interview meadows. but you have to ask, what has the department of justice been doing for the last seven months when it comes to mark meadows? on monday night on this show, i asked the same thing about donald trump. but look, i get that prosecuting a former president for inciting a coup and trying to deprive millions of americans of a fair election process can be a bit complicated. it's unprecedented.
but it shouldn't be for a now private citizen like mark meadows. why is he still a free bird, out there acting like trump's ever so loyal chief of staff? >> the magic is still there. we've been here actually working on what comes next, not only in 2024 but how we win back the house in 2022. we're looking at what does come next. i'm not authorized to speak on behalf of the president. >> okay. >> but i can tell you this, steve, we wouldn't be meeting tonight if we weren't making plans to move forward in a real way and with president trump at the head of that ticket. >> but mark meadows' role is just a piece of the attempt to overthrow the united states government. now we are learning even more, according to politico. in late december trumped asked his acting attorney general, jeffrey rosen, about a legal strategy that would have urged the supreme court to declare that the electoral college votes from six key swing states lost
by trump cannot be counted because of baseless allegations of fraud. and for the justices to order a special election for president to be held in those states. and there it is. there it is. the trump white house in the form of the president and his chief of staff was trying to serve up a coup and expected everyone from the department of justice to the supreme court to help them get away with it. joyce vance is an msnbc legal analyst and a former u.s. attorney for the northern district of alabama and she joins me now. joyce, thanks for coming on the show tonight. mark meadows is a private citizen. what kind of criminal exposure might he have right now? i want to play to you a bit more from that january phone call with georgia secretary of state raffensperger. here he's trying to persuade the state's general counsel to give over voter data to the trump team with an assist from the president himself. have a listen. >> what you're saying, ryan,
hold on, let me make sure. so what you're saying is you really don't want to give access to the data, you just want to make another case on why the lawsuit is wrong? >> i don't think we can give access to data that's protected by law. but we can sit down with them and say -- >> but you're allowed to have a phony election? you're allowed to have a phony election, right? >> what type of criminal liability does mark meadows have in a state like georgia? >> it's an important question and the answer, medhi, may be not the one you're looking for is that doj should be investigating to determine the answer to exactly that question. based on what's on the public record these days, we know that there's reason for doj to be looking at a number of crimes, particularly whether there was a conspiracy to defraud the government, whether there was some form of election interference or even criminal violation of the hatch act. all of those cases need to be
fully investigated to determine whether any of them should be brought. the interesting twist here is doj typically likes to keep its criminal investigations very private until they reach a decision and they only announce indictments once they're ordained by the grand jury. so it's a little bit difficult for us to know precisely what's going on at this point in time. >> but just to be clear, you mentioned those cases. those are all criminal cases if they went forward, election interference, conspiracy to overturn the government. this is serious stuff. and i just want to add to that, joyce, now damning do you think former u.s. attorney bjay pak's testimony was today. senator blumenthal said that he had answered all questions in a seemingly honest and candid way and that my impression is that he believes in the rule of law and he stood up for it. how much does that weigh into all of this? >> if pak's testimony is as
reported, it's just another nail in the coffin here because, you know, trump did so many things that were horrible that it can become difficult to focus on any one of them. but here we have a u.s. attorney who has been appointed by this president and he conducts investigation in his district, the fbi does, and they determine that there's no actionable voter fraud. that should be the end of it. that's a decision that should be backed by the deputy attorney general and the attorney general. and instead, the top leadership of the department bows to pressure from the white house. and that pressure is essentially this. we don't like the real facts. we want the facts to be something different so we can steal an election. that was a moment where the leadership of the justice department should have stood up. and if pak was going to be forced to resign, they should have resigned along with him. >> yes. and you have former acting a.g. jeffrey rosen who's been testifying in front of congress
and to the justice department inspector general sounding to me like a hero, the man who stopped trump from overturning the election. is he a hero in your view? >> i think it's great that he's testifying now. it's important that we learn the true facts about these failed efforts by trump to find a way to subvert the election, which ultimately left him in his mind with no option other than to go forward with the events on january 6th. that historical trail is important. it would have been far more valuable for the country to learn these facts while the impeachment was live and ongoing. >> oh, yes. >> the country was at a real risk. i think perhaps we forget how dramatic those events on january 6th were. this attorney general could have been a profile in courage by coming forward and trying to stop these events before they went into motion. >> one last quick question, joyce. do you believe the merrick garland doj is up to the task of
investigating, indicting, possibly prosecuting donald trump and his cronies or is that a bridge too far for this administration? >> this is an impeccably well qualified doj. everyone from the attorney general on down who will be involved in considerations of investigations and prosecutions has deep experience. they know the business of prosecutions. medhi, you've heard me say so many times that it's a lot easier to be an arm chair prosecutor than it is to actually be the perpendicular who's in the grand jury looking at the evidence, making sure that you've got proof beyond a reasonable doubt on all elements of a crime before you indict. i think the folks that president biden has put in place are more than capable of making these tough decisions. these are people who will resist any sort of external pressure. they'll just look at the facts and the law. >> let's see what happens. joyce vance, thank you so much for joining us tonight. congresswoman madeleine dean
is a democrat from pennsylvania and a former impeachment manager. she joins me live now. congresswoman, as a former impeachment manager, what are you thinking when you hear about the scope of mark meadows' efforts to help trump overthrow the election? wall street journal reporter michael bender writes in his new book that mark meadows had helped introduce trump to doj attorney jeffrey clark who was putting together to oust rosen the acting a.g. and force georgia to overturn his results. mark meadows seems to be integral to all of this, was he not? >> thank you for having me. i'm joining you from my car. i apologize, we're in between summer storms here in pennsylvania in my district. i just left a roomful of montgomery county young democrats. they are so eager to learn more about what happened, what failed, who stepped up and served and who did not. so mark meadows, what a deep, deep disappointment. but you can see what happened here. as you pointed out in your reporting, this is his fourth chief of staff.
trump was -- his circle was shrinking. the pool of qualified people was shrinking. and so he put people around him who was willing to do his bidding. and what these tapes reveal, it's another set of data points and i have a feeling we're going to see a white house, whether it's the chief of staff or mr. trump himself with a full-time job of calling people, elected officials, state election officials, legislators trying to overturn the election. mark meadows is -- it's gravely disappointing and of course we'll need to hear much more about these phone calls, emails and others, trying to persuade people to say the election was fraudulent when 60 courts or more said it was not. >> yes. congresswoman, how do you view the former acting attorney general, jeffrey rosen? some democrats have hailed him as a courageous whistle-blower, but he didn't come forward
during the impeachment hearings. in fact rosen testified before congress and was asked whether trump asked him to interfere in the election and he dodged that question. have a listen. >> prior to january 6, were you asked or instructed by president trump to take any action at the department to advance election fraud claims or to seek to overturn any part of the 2020 election results? >> well, congressman, as just alluded to in your prior question, i can tell you what the actions of the department were. >> no, sir. no, sir. >> i cannot tell you -- >> mr. rosen. >> -- about private conversations with the president one way or the other. >> what do you make of former acting a.g. jeffrey rosen, congresswoman? >> thank you for asking. and i want to reserve judgment. i want to point out two things. on the one hand he came before -- voluntarily came before senate judiciary and offered hours and hours of what
i am sure is going to be very valuable testimony. like you, i wish he had come forward sooner. but you have to remember, this is a change of administrations. from the trump administration who treated the department of justice as its own personal political law firm to do its bidding under a.g. barr and others. so the transition to biden and merrick garland, it was merrick garland and his department of justice that just, i guess it was in the last month, freed people to testify, no cloud. so i'm going to reserve judgment and try to understand why it is that mr. rosen didn't come forward sooner, but i certainly thank him for doing two things, coming forward now and holding the line when the president of the united states urged him and his deputy to simply call it corrupt and leave the rest to me and my republican congressmen friends. mr. rosen held the line there.
>> yes. one last quick question. will we ever see, do you think, criminal charges against donald trump and his top aides? and if not, aren't we saying to americans, to the world, that yes, somebody is beyond the law in america? and also aren't we just risking another coup attempt in the future? >> i don't know the answer to your question. i certainly know that we have many folks looking at criminal charges. it sure seems as though charges should be brought. in many cases and in many levels. what this all opponents out is something else that happened this week and i want to compare and contrast value system between democrats, who in the face of mr. cuomo's difficulties, troubles, and behaviors came forward after they saw the independent a.g. report and said he must resign. he does not represent the values of a public servant. he created a toxic work environment. he sexually harassed members of
his staff. democrats came out, including the very president of the united states and said you've got to resign. what have republicans like mark meadows done over the course of the past six years in the face of the corruption and indecency and alleged illegal matters around a president. look at them surrounding him still, holding up him still. isolating or attempting to insulate him from the corruption, indecency and criminal charges that he should face. >> it's mind boggling. it is truly mind boggling. congressman madeline sgleen dean. >> it reveals values. you don't need to look much farther than that. >> thank you so much for your time tonight. appreciate it. >> thank you very much. good to be with you. when texas democrats fled the state a month ago to try and stop republicans from ramming through voter suppression bills
in a special legislative session, this was how the governor of texas responded. >> i can and i will continue to call special session after special session after special session, all the way up until election next year. as soon as they come back in the state of texas, they will be arrested, they will be cabined inside the texas capitol until they get their job done. >> well, tonight he's made good on part of that threat. there are now arrest warrants out on those texas democrats. one of them joins me next. ocrats one of them joins me next. ♪ ♪ ♪ hey google, turn up the heat. ♪ ♪ ♪
it's the biggest sale of the year, on the new sleep number 360 smart bed. it's the most comfortable, dually-adjustable, foot-warming, temperature-balancing proven quality night sleep we've ever made. save 50% on the new sleep number 360 limited edition smart bed. plus, 0% interest for 24 months. only for a limited time. [sfx: radio being tuned] welcome to allstate. ♪ [band plays] ♪ a place where everyone lives life well-protected. ♪♪ and even when things go a bit wrong, we've got your back.
comcast nbcuniversal is investing in entrepreneurs to bring what's next for sports technology to athletes, teams, and fans. that's why we created the sportstech accelerator, to invest in and develop the next generation of technology that will change the way we experience sports. we've already invested in entrepreneurs like ane swim, who develops products that provide hair protection so that everyone can enjoy the freedom of swimming. like the athletes competing in tokyo, these entrepreneurs have a fierce work ethic and drive to achieve - to change the game and inspire the team of tomorrow.
texas is in crisis. the state has seen more than 32,000 new covid cases over the past 72 hours, and dozens of hospitals are out of icu beds. but guess what, the gop-led state legislature has other priorities. while there are plans to consider a bill appropriating federal covid funds, the bulk of the current legislative session is focused on like banning critical race theory for the second time, or blocking transgender athletes from competing in school sports. and of course that bill restricting voting rights, which is the reason nearly 60 democratic lawmakers fled the state more than a month ago. texas law requires a certain number of legislators to be present for work to begin. most of those democrats have not returned to the capitol. so simply refusing to show up is their only way to block the anti-democratic gop agenda. meanwhile those budget conscious state republicans are keeping
the session active despite it costing taxpayers $43,000 a day. and in a dramatic escalation, the republican statehouse speaker has signed more than 50 civil arrest warrants for the missing democrats, which means they can be detained and compelled to return to the capitol. joining me now is joining me is one of those democrats, jasmine crockett, state representative representing texas' 100th district. representative crockett, thank you for joining us. there is currently a civil warrant with your name on it. are you concerned about being compelled to returning to the capitol in texas? because you're still in d.c. right now, aren't you? >> i am in d.c. i'm actually very close to the white house now and i'm supposed to be having dinner with two of john lewis' brothers at this moment. i'm not concerned. for those that don't know, my background is that i am a criminal defense attorney and we have some of the most amazing attorneys that have jumped on the case. so we are fighting this in
various venues. one of them is in harris county, a county that oddly enough, the republicans have targeted all session long, including these special sessions. and so i do anticipate that i will be able to be victorious as relates to a writ which will allow me to walk about freely and do the work in my district until we have a hearing on the validity as to whether or not the speaker can even effectuate these warrants. >> so the republicans, i think, are now around five members short of what they need to get their legislation passed. how long can texas democrats realistically keep this going, civil warrants, arrest warrants or not? >> i think so long as we have some protection from the courts, then we're okay. i think it becomes very questionable if we lose those protections. and right now, we're looking at being protected. and i believe that my colleagues
are going to hold on. we have been fighting for so long and we know that the fight isn't quite over. we know that we've done what we could do here in d.c. we saw what happened at 4:00 a.m. when our wonderful senator from texas decided that he did not want any voting legislation to even be debated about. and so now people need to be at home. we need to be helping our constituency because as you stated, our governor is failing all texans, including our constituents. and so we need to be on the ground. we need to be helping out with covid vaccinations. we need to be going door to door to make sure we're checking up on people, that they have access to the information they need to protect themselves. honestly i personally need to back up people like my county judge who is going up against our governor as relates to him deciding that there could be no mask mandates. >> representative crockett, i'll be interviewing democratic senator chris van hollen in a
moment. what is your message to him, to senate democrats, when it comes to protecting democracy in texas and elsewhere? what do you want them to do that they're not doing? >> it starts with passing hr-1 obviously. you know, what i want senate democrats to see is that we have a governor that is hell bent on doing whatever it takes to infringe upon the voting rights of the majority of texans. he is so hell bent that they are all about wrangling us into the chamber and making us be there to vote. imagine that. they want to make us vote to take away the rights of so many. if they can do all of that with their majority, then what we can simply do is convince all of our colleagues on the democratic side that this is bigger than texas. that this is something that we've got to do to save democracy. that is what we were elected to
do. democrats tend to be the good guys. we need to be the good guys right now, because we see what the bad guys are doing. and if they're doing it in texas, they're going to do it in georgia, they're going to do it in arizona, they're going to do it in florida. we see what they're doing. they are trying to take us down. and that's not what any of us should stand for. but we see that they are not the party of the republicans that just have philosophical differences. we see that they are the party of trump, and the party of the proud boys and the party of insurrectionists. we need to save our democracy and we need to save it like yesterday. >> yes, indeed we do. whether the democrats in the senate are listening, we will find out later on the show andy will be speaking to senator chris van hollen. for now representative jasmine crockett, thank you so much for your time tonight. appreciate it. >> thank you so much. every single republican in the united states senate just voted against even debating a voting rights bill. so where are the democrats on
killing the filibuster to save american democracy? >> we have made progress and we are showing very clearly to every one of our 50 senators that republicans won't join us. and yet the importance of voting rights, if anything, has strengthened in the minds of everybody, everybody. >> the trade-offs in the senate and the price of bipartisanship with a top democratic senator, next. don't go away. c senator, next don't go away. ♪ ♪
we just saw a tiny blip of bipartisanship with the trillion dollar infrastructure bill that passed yesterday in the united states senate with 19 republican votes, including republican minority leader mitch mcconnell. that stands in stark contrast to today, when every single senate republican blocked advancing the voting rights act before heading off for a month-long summer recess. so even the republicans can do
bipartisanship, it does not mean they will. because saving the anti-democratic filibuster is the thing republicans care most about, senators like shelley moore capito of west virginia is out pretending there will be many more bipartisan bills moving forward, so why get rid of the filibuster saying, quote, when we work together and really put the nose to the grindstone, we can get bipartisan support to move forward. that's what the bipartisan group did so i think it blunts the argument on the filibuster. well, saying the quiet part loud. the thing is, it is worth it for mitch mcconnell to vote for a bipartisan infrastructure bill if it means preserving their beloved filibuster. if it means they can kill other democratic priorities including the protection of our voting rights. while it's great this country is getting new roads and bridges, what does it matter if the country ends up not being a proper democracy anymore? i'm joined now to talk about all this by democratic senator chris
van hollen of maryland. he's a member of the budget committee which crafted the $3.5 trillion budget resolution which the senate passed overnight. the bipartisan infrastructure bill was a big win for your party, for the white house, but it also seems like mitch mcconnell and the republicans see it as a win for them, as a way of blunting the effort to getting rid of the filibuster in order to get an even bigger win for themselves on voting rights. >> well, medhi, i'm glad that we got the bipartisan win on modernizing our physical infrastructure, but probably the more important and more revealing vote was the one right after that when we moved to go to the budget resolution which will help expand job opportunities and educational opportunities for every american. republicans voted no. that legislation would cut the cost of prescription drugs. they voted no. that would allow medicare to
cover dental and hearing and vision services. they voted no. but here's the catch. we were allowed to go forward with it because the senate rules say that when there's a budget-related thing, you can pass things with a majority 51 senator vote the way democracy is supposed to work. and if you can do it for a budget-related thing, for god sakes, you should be able to do it to get a majority to protect our democracy. and so that should be the lesson that came out of last night. >> so i want to come back to the budget reconciliation bill in a moment, but just sticking with the democratic angle, the small d democratic angle. i want to play to you what chuck schumer has said recently about the importance of passing pro democracy voting rights legislation. have a listen. >> and what did democrats make clear? that we're standing up to voter suppression. failure is not an option. voting is too sacred and
everything will be on the table to get it done. in the fight for voting rights, this vote was the starting gun, not the finish line. voting rights will be the very first matter of legislative business when the senate returns to session in september. >> so i hear democrats, especially senate democrats, talking a big game about protecting voting rights, defending free and fair elections. but if your caucus doesn't get rid of the filibuster, what can you really deliver? we know that you cannot get voting rights done without getting rid of the filibuster? >> well, medhi, that's right. we have to change the rule. it's an anti-democratic, small d, rule. it's an invention of the senate. and if the senate can change its rules to allow budget bills to pass by a majority vote, certainly we should be able to change the rules to allow majority vote to protect our
democracy. after all, just back in 2017, republicans used the 51 votes and a budget resolution to give a big corporate tax break giveaway. what we're saying to all our colleagues, trying to persuade all 50 senate democratic colleagues to focus on, how does it make sense to have a rule that allows the majority, which allows democracy to work on budget bills, which it should, but not to allow us to protect our democracy when you have these state legislatures like those in texas and the legislator you just interviewed, you have those republicans trying to put up obstacles, trying to block people from access to the ballot box. and so you're absolutely right. we are going to need to muster the 50 votes to change, amend the filibuster, whether it's a one-time change for the protection of democracy or what i would prefer is to get rid of
the filibuster. but regardless, that kind of change has to go forward in order to make sure and make real the commitment to protect voting rights. >> so one of the people blocking that change is of course joe manchin, your colleague from west virginia. he's not just standing in the way of filibuster reform. he put out a statement today basically attacking the budget reconciliation bill, the $3.5 trillion price tag. he says it's too big, it's too inflationary. he also said adding trillions of dollars more to nearly $29 trillion of national debt without any consideration of the negative effects on our children and grandchildren is one of those decisions that has become far too easy in washington. you are on the budget committee to help write this bill. what is your response to your democratic colleague's concerns, which many would say sound like rip concerns, about the debt? >> on the debt issue as we've said in the budget committee, we
are going to pay for this investment, the $3 trillion proposal. we're going to pay for it through tax reform. we're going to pay for it by closing down some of those huge corporate loopholes that allow corporations to park their profits overseas in places like the cayman islands rather than contributing to investment here in the united states. we're going to close loopholes that allow multi multimillionaires to pay zero income taxes, as we saw recently. and i think that's going to be something that brings the democratic caucus together. the other thing i want to mention here, people talk about the $3.5 trillion. it's important to recognize that as biden has laid out his proposal, over a trillion dollars of that is actually tax cuts to middle class families, right? it includes extending those payments, those monthly payments of up to $300 per child to
families. so republicans who say they're voting against it, they're voting against tax cuts for middle class families. in fact, one of the biggest tax cuts for middle class families in american history. and so it's important to recognize that this bill includes tax cuts for middle class families as well as investments in things like early education, as well as investments in making sure folks on medicare can get coverage for vision, dental and hearing service. if republicans want to say no to seniors on that, you know, they can vote that way. but i think our colleagues will at the end of the day come together on these issues. >> i hope you're right, both on budget reconciliation, but i hope you're more right about voting rights. we'll have to leave it there. senator chris van hollen of maryland, thank you so much for your time tonight. i appreciate it. >> good to be with you, thanks. coming up, medical professionals harassed for trying to protect kids from covid.
>> we know who you are. we know who you are. you can leave freely, but we can find you and we know who you are. we know who you are. >> you will never be allowed -- >> the dangerous and unhinged response to masks in schools and the hypocritical republicans pushing against the mandates. i'll explain next. the mandates i'll explain next. ♪ birds flyin' high you know how i feel ♪ ♪ breeze drifting on by you know how i feel ♪ [man: coughing] ♪ it's a new dawn, it's a new day... ♪ no matter how you got copd it's time to make a stand. ♪ ...and i'm feelin' good ♪ start a new day with trelegy. no once-daily copd medicine has the power to treat copd in as many ways as trelegy. with three medicines in one inhaler, trelegy helps people breathe easier and improves lung function. it also helps prevent future flare-ups. trelegy won't replace a rescue inhaler for sudden breathing problems. tell your doctor if you have a heart condition or high blood pressure before taking it.
do not take trelegy more than prescribed. trelegy may increase your risk of thrush, pneumonia, and osteoporosis. call your doctor if worsened breathing, chest pain, mouth or tongue swelling, problems urinating, vision changes, or eye pain occur. it's time to start a new day. ask your doctor about once-daily trelegy. and save at trelegy.com.
fixodent. and forget it. one of the most frustrating aspects of this pandemic has been the way in which basic public health measures like social distancing, masks, vaccines, have all been dragged by the gop into america's ridiculous culture wars. i mean just check out this video. a school board meeting in franklin, tennessee, last night showing anti-mask protesters screaming at medical professionals who had just spoken in favor of masks in schools. >> we know who you are. >> we know who you are. >> we know who you are. you can leave freely, but we will find you and we know who
you are. >> you won't be allowed in public again. you will never be allowed in public again. >> we know who you are. >> absolutely bonkers. here's the thing. as with so many culture war issues, liberals and democrats are running away from these fights when they should be leaning into them and winning them. those screaming anti-maskers are not the majority in this country. just look at this new polling out today from morning skull and politico. 56% of registered voters say they support requiring vaccines for all americans except those with medical conditions. we know the vast majority of american adults support that. 71.2% have had at least one shot. this new polling shows broad support for mask mandates too. 64% of registered voters say they support local governments requiring employees to wear masks in offices. 61% support masks for indoor dining. 62% support requiring masks at gyms. and 65% support requiring masks
at entertainment venues. so these mandates are clearly a winning issue for democrats. a clear and big majority of the american people are on their side. oh, and as for the other side, well, they are just drenched in hypocrisy. take a listen to texas republican senator ted cruz's latest anti-mask mandate, anti-vaccine rant on fox news earlier this week. >> my views were very simple. there should be no mandates, zero concerning covid. that means no mask mandates, regardless of your vaccination status. that means no vaccine mandates. that means no vaccine passports. and i've introduced legislation, a bill to ban vaccine passports. this week i'm introducing a bill to ban vaccine mandates. and this week i'm introducing a bill to end mask mandates. >> just one small point, ted cruz. your children attend an elite private school in houston, texas, at a cost of more than
$25,000 a year, whereas the blog boing boing reports masks are required. the school views the use of face covering as an important way that we as a community can slow the spread of the virus and protect one another. due to the current situation in our community, all persons on campus will be required to have a face covering. so according to ted cruz, there should be no mask mandates except, apparently, at his own kids' very expensive school. no mandatory masks for your children in the classroom, but they're fine for mine. oh, hypocrisy, ted cruz be thy name. coming up, another bad faith argument often made by republicans against vaccine mandates is that they're anti-freedom, anti-liberty. but even staunch libertarian scholars are saying they're in favor of such mandates. i'll talk to one of them right here next. one of th em right here next. ♪ rock n't ti boat over ♪ here we go. ♪ don't rock the boat, baby rock the boat ♪ see disney's jungle cruise.
it's time to rock the boat, america. look at you! getting back to normal. or at least your 2021 version of what normal should be. and no matter what that is, walgreens is here to help you do it your way. with delivery in as little as one hour. because now... things come to you. same day vaccination appointments. because you're ready. and walgreens cash rewards you can donate back to your community. the new normal? have to admit, it does have its upside.
and savings like that will have you jumping for joy. now, get new lower auto rates with allstate. because better protection costs a whole lot less. you're in good hands with allstate. click or call for a lower auto rate today. is your family ready for an emergency? you can prepare by mapping out two ways to escape your home, creating a supply kit, and including your whole family in practice drills. for help creating an emergency plan, visit safetyactioncenter.pge.com
policies of the petty tyrants and bureaucrats. >> they do not respect your liberty. >> i see no reason to be pushing vaccines on people. >> they want to mandate, to impose. >> individual safety is managed every day as a matter of personal responsibility rather than by government mandate. >> there's been talk about people advocating at the federal level imposing compulsory masks on kids. we're not doing that in florida, okay? >> republican politicians like to pretend they're sticking to libertarian values, as reasons to oppose just about every measure that could stem the spread of covid. but a lot of actual libertarian scholars say vaccine mandates are okay, they're fine.
you can have personal freedom for yourself, but not at the expense of others. a professor of law at george mason university joins me now. professor, thanks so much for coming on the show. explain to our viewers why vaccine mandates are not oppression or tyranny as some have claimed in recent days. >> thank you for having me. i think they are a restriction on freedom, but they're a very small one, with a very large payoff, not just for the person who gets vaccinated, but for other people who they come into contact with as well. that makes them different from other infringements on liberty like lockdowns, with little or no benefit except possibly to the individual themselves. i think vaccine are a special case, you get a small infringement on freedom, you get
the jab, but then you can move on with your life. on the other hand, there's a big payoff in terms of saving lives. whereas other restrictions on liberty are more severe and very different. >> you've done all the reading, you've done the intellectual heavy lifting. but a wonder for others if whether libertarianism is an excuse to act selfishly and pretend it's about freedom and liberty. >> people of almost every ideology cite liberty when they think it will benefit them. but i don't think either they or other politicians on the right
or left necessarily exemplify libertarianism. >> rand paul does the schtick about libertarianism, but you have people like ron desantis blaming immigrants for the spread of covid, supporting the building of a wall. how does that fit with libertarianism? >> very poorly. libertarianism opposes restrictions on liberty, and there are few more severe
restrictions than restrictions on immigration. rand paul is a quote-unquote constitutional conservative. he is not a libertarian and doesn't claim to be. >> what is your position on mask mandates? we talked about vaccine mandates. you said the infringement is minor, and the payoff is big. the other big row, when we played a clip earlier in tennessee, people screaming about masks. they seem to have lost their minds on the right about putting a mask on their face for a few hours a day. republican governors going out of their way to ban mask mandates. what is the libertarian position on mask mandates? >> i don't know if there's one single position on this, but my view is that they're very different from vaccine mandates.
it's potentially any time you go inside to an indoor public space, you get this pretty severe restriction, which is painful and annoying for many people, particularly those with glasses or a sensitive face and other conditions. it also inhibits communication, which studies say often comes from facial expressions. and the evidence that it helps prevent covid is much, much weaker than vaccines. so we have a much more severe imposition on liberty than vaccines. my view is, if you have the option of vaccination, which we do, and if necessary in some cases you can use vaccine main mandates, that's the option, rather than mask mandates, lockdowns, migration restrictions, and so on. >> well, i mean, we can disagree
on the masks. but i'm glad you're speaking out against vaccine mandates. thank you, professor. >> that's all for all in this wednesday night. the rachel maddow show starts right now. >> good evening. thanks for joining us this hour. the word failure is never good news. coming from a doctor, all the more so. but when you hear that word used as it was today by the clinical director of one state's flagship university hospital and level one trauma center, when you hear that word, failure, used this specific way by this specific kind of doctor, that is not just bad news. that is national news. >> so since the pandemic, i think the thing that hospi