tv All In With Chris Hayes MSNBC May 20, 2022 12:00am-1:00am PDT
chairing that really important. sorry and on that note, i wish you all a very good night! from all of our colleagues across the networks of nbc news, thank you for staying up late. i will see you next week! in the baby formula shortage only to vote against government in in the baby formula shortage. it all makes sense if we really would really drives republicans and all routes plane. then as one another republican congressman, former attorney general eric holder, and the threats to american democracy and who should be held accountable >> given what we have learned i think he has to
be held accountable. plus, the dangers of redistricting to the democratic party and. all in starts right now. good evening from new york, i'm chris hayes, the nationwide baby formula shortage has been a terrifying experience for lots of families. which is why congress and the white house just took action. the house passed two bills, one which will make it easier for poor families to access formula. that passed with near universal support, that's good. the second bill, designed to address the baby formula crisis by giving the food and drug administration $20 million, that bill was opposed by nearly 200 house republicans. just voted no. that may come as a surprise to you if you pay attention to politics over the past few weeks republicans across the country have been using the formula shortage as a cudgel to attack democrats ahead of november's midterm elections.
the attacks were everywhere. the highest ranking republican in the house, held. on the formal issue last week. right now, families across america are struggling to feed their babies, due to horrific nationwide baby formula shortage. and i cannot think of a more harrowing panicked crisis for parents to face and desperately trying to find food and for the newborn babies to push for action from the fda and the biden ministration who should have planned for the shortage months ago. instead, bare shelves biden has continued to pass the buck. >> the biden administration has a plan, they vote the third most powerful person in the house, just voted against a big part of the plan. and she's not alone. every single person in the soundbite i'm going to play you also voted against it. >> moms and dads all over the
country, some of them are traveling hours every single day, looking for baby formula. this is a crisis that should never be happening, this is completely, squarely on the shoulders of the biden administration, and the democrats that are controlling our government. >> president biden the fda must do more. this is a matter of life or death. >> maybe that's where the shortage is coming from, or could it be from the pallets that are being sent to the southern border for the illegal aliens that are breaking the laws for arc to our country. >> a stark reminder, the ceaseless culture war of american life, but most of governing is about. the $28 million to the fda to try and help solve this crisis. governing, real governing, the actual thing that our elected representatives do, is dealing with the allocation of resources and implementing regulations, attempting to solve difficult problems. trying to make a wide swath of peoples lives materially better, give them the tools and the ability to flourish. those fundamentals of
governance, like the brass tacks stuff, is basically the last thing republicans want to talk about. it's become even more obvious during this high-profile republican primaries, like in pennsylvania, where the too close to call race between hedge fund mill your david mccormack and doctor mehmet oz is basically all culture war grievance politics. i should be fair, this are centrally to issues the republicans will tell you squarely where they stand. portion, which they think should be banned, increasingly in all cases, maybe even criminalized for doctors and women, and guns, which they think should be widely available and unrestricted in every way. republicans running for office do not talk about actual policy. it's just fearmongering about critical race theory, lgbtq rights, pledging to fire doctor fauci, covid mandates that have already been lifted, and the quote, invasion of the border. a big part of the reasons republican their entire
economic agenda, such as it exists, which can be a little bit hard to figure out, is wildly unpopular. cut taxes for the wealthiest americans, give handouts to kneecap labor unions, do nothing to improve the regular lives of regular working people. which is why, when donald trump first ran for president 2016, he didn't really focused on his economic agenda or the republicans economic agenda. he ran a nativist campaign. built on culture war grievances and white identity politics in trade. that was one area policy, trade. where he disagreed with republican mainstream. correctly so. intuit inc. people wanted to hear. but then once he actually took office, remember this, there was one big gorgeous late of domestic policy accomplishment, it was an enormous tax cut, focused on corporations, the largest corporate tax cut in 30 years, and it was also disproportionate going to the wealthy. and it is worth noting that the
lowest point in double trump's approval rating over four years, other than the days immediately after january 6th, was in late 2017, republicans were publicly debating the tax cuts which were then and remain remarkably unpopular with voters. and i gotta say, give him credit. republicans, most of them, are savvy enough and they know this, republican senate leader mitch mcconnell when asked about his party's agenda heading into the midterms. >> if republicans take back control of congress at of the midterms, what would be your agenda? >> that is a very good question. and i'll let you know when we take it back. >> ha. i'm not telling you. i know that telling you what i'm going to do will make it less like leo we win. and i'm the only person, who is not in on the joke, who didn't get the memo's republican senator rick scott of florida. he's the head of the natural republican senatorial committee, and the person in charge of
getting republicans reelected into the senate. -- instead of just the culture war distractions that they talk about in the campaign trail. in a draconian move that leaves new meaning to the term regressive taxation, he would raise taxes for poor working families. he said they need quote, have skin in the game, wealth cutting funding and making it harder to audit the superrich for tax evasion. get this, scott's plans would also end social security and medicare within five years. and it. and in many ways, senator scott is the perfect messenger for this agenda, because he himself, good for him, the richest member of congress, multimillionaire including the one which was fined 1.7 billion dollars for medicare fraud. they were keeping two sides of the books while he was ceo. but scott committed the cardinal sin. he talked about actual policy, particularly actual economic policy, and unsurprisingly,
guess what's, no one likes him. his ideas are very unpopular. which is why his fellow senators and allies in right-wing media, are trying to get him to shut up. >> i spoke to several senators, and they said, nobody signed on to rick scott's plan. nobody. and that means nobody. it's never gonna make the floor, mitch mcconnell doesn't like it, rick scott junior senator from florida, who cares? >> pay no attention to the agenda outlined by the man trying to win a senate majority. but you know what's, good for rick scott. at least it's being honest and somewhat transparent about what he wants to do, while the rest of republicans want you to pay attention to the imaginary invasion, and the 16 19 project. but here's the thing, i can't stress the strongly enough, politics, ultimately is not a cable news show. it's not a twitter fight. it's real people, real groups of people, with real material interests. which brings me to the latest outburst from the billionaires. elon musk, you may have noticed, has now declared democrats are
to mean and hurt his feelings, and because of that, he will now be voting republican from now on. jeff bezos, the third richest man in the world, has suddenly started attacking president biden on twitter, after biden held an event with leaders from the amazon union. let me say, my suspicion is that musk and bezos ire towards biden has nothing to do with tone, and everything to do with their fortunes, which is to say, their material interests. they know which party is better for billionaires. and to that i say good. if democrats are doing anything right, billionaire should be voting republican. the fact that billionaires are coming out against them means they are. so the biden ministration should keep supporting unions and aggressively -- democrats should focus on actually improving the material conditions of peoples lives. and making sure that voters know, whenever the cultural controversy of the day's, as soon as republicans take power, they will use that power to
benefit corporate america, and the interests of the very rich. they've done it time and time again. they'll do it again. and if there they'll hike taxes for working people to boot. everyone across the country should know that when they vote. robert reich served as secretary of labor during the clinton administration, he's now the chancellors professor of public policy on the -- . university of california berkeley, he's the author of the system who rigged it how do we fix it. he joins me now. robert, it striking to me that one of the things you do when you're in opposition party is you run a referendum on how things are going. and this is not rocket scientists, if you are -- there's lots of things about american life that feel disturbed and strange and not settled. easy enough. but it also feels to me that it's both incumbent on the media and democrats to say that what will you do about it, when you're going to do. and to the extent that they can
get away with not answering it, they're going to be benefited, to the extent they have to answer it, i think that would be better for voters and probably better for the democratic party. >> well, i agree with you chris, . it's interesting we have one party, the republican party right now, that is using the cultural grievances as a major distraction from the fact that they have no agenda. i mean, as you played in that clip of mitch mcconnell, what are you going to do if you actually get control of congress? i just don't know. there's nothing there. there's no there there. the real problem is, the republican party is great at attacks, they have perfected the art of attacking. but they are not in governing party. they don't know how to come up with policies. and that is, bad for the country. it's bad for democrats, and they is also a problem with a regard of average working people, who, kitchen table economics, they need better jobs. they need childcare.
they need lower prescription drug pricing. they need all sorts of things. democrats are actually passing this stuff, or trying to pass it, and republicans are saying no. >> they're trying i think is part of the problem to. to the extent that you can't pass big parts of your agenda, that's a hard thing to run on, though i should note, one of the amazing ironies here is that the big thing they did pass, the american rescue plan, you've got this bizarre situation every republican votes against it. in the u.s. senate. every democrat votes for it. it gave all this money to the states who are now using the largest from the federal government to dole out goodies well attacking the democrats. this is the orlando sentinel talking about ron desantis, who's going around to events cutting checks, we're proud we didn't do like washington unspent money like a drunken sailor when all of a sudden you add up all these problems. where he doled out federally funded grants. desantis never never mentioned the largest he is sharing comes from washington. instead, he attributes the
money to florida's strong economy. democrats are the worst of both worlds, -- the republicans are opposed, local republicans get to claim credit for. >> and this is not a new phenomenon, chris. this is been going on for years. just more of it right now. back in 1936, frank roosevelt was opposed by the rich and the powerful, and republicans, and he said i welcome their hatred. i welcome their hatred. because that hatred made it clear to the public that he was on their side. i think the democrats ought to be very clear about this. i welcome elon musk's moving to the republican party. we welcome the fact that jeff bezos is attacking the president. the billionaires are on the side of billionaires. and the democrats are on the side of average, working people and poor people, and people who need some help. people who are actually working
harder than ever as ceo pay goes through the roof. as corporate profits hit record levels. as prices go up, why? you tell me, why do corporations who have never had, in 70 years, as profitable a run as they have right now, why are they raising prices? well, they don't have to raise prices. and that's what democrats ought to be talking about. >> robert reich, as paused thank you talking to us. >> thanks chris. >> next up, the january 6th select committee calls another republican to testify. this time over a tour of the capital complex the day before the insurrection. plus, new reporting that bill barr is in talks to cooperate with the investigation, eric holder wakes in right after this. eric holder wakes in right afte this
as a business owner, your bottom line is always top of mind. so start saving by switching to the mobile service designed for small business: comcast business mobile. flexible data plans mean you can get unlimited data or pay by the gig. all on the most reliable 5g network. with no line activation fees or term contracts... saving you up to $500 a year.
asking for his voluntary cooperation saying quote, based on our review of evidence in the select committee's confession, we believe you have information regarding the tour you left in parts of the capital complex. on january 5th, 2021. republicans on the committee of house committees duration of which you remember, claimed to have reviewed security footage from the days preceding january 6th, and determined there were no tours, no large groups, no one with maga hats on. however, the select committee's evidence directly refutes that denial. this letter highlights the from democrats in congress and members of the bipartisan committee including republicans and the people the highest echelons of the republican were collaborative in the coup and the assault on democracy. a position that we've seen rewarded by republican voters across the country. the remaining outstanding questions about who will be held to account ultimately. last week, for instance, eric holder says the doj expected the department of justice if it finds sufficient information
and proof of intent, would have to indict donald trump and hold him accountable for his attempt to overturn the election. there's new book, our unfinished. a history a crisis a plane and eric holder joins me now. eric holder joins me now. i know that you are loathe to do any second-guessing or coaching of the man who now occupies the office that you had. i'm sure when you are in that office you didn't like to be coached or second-guessed yourself, but in an abstract sensed, just take me through your understanding of the evidence that is accruing and the decision process that would happen inside the department of justice about questions about in days diamonds with respect to people from the president and his inner circle for the kinds of crimes than other people at lower levels along the chain have already been indicted. >> you certainly have to draw the connections and show that they were substantively
involved in that they had direct intent. i started my career as a public corruption prosecutor. after a while, these kinds of matters, you get a sense of direction, of where they are heading, i am at that point now. after the revelations from the january six committee, the great job that journalists have done in revealing a whole variety of things, i think you get a sense of the direction of this, and i think you end up with i think people at the justice department are certainly going to be examined, certainly people who are going to people on january 6th and the question ultimately is the ex president. my guess is going to be, is that they are going to have sufficient substance proof, that they're going to be able to show that we have the requisite intent. if that is the case, i think he has to be held accountable. i have said
that's going to be a divisive thing. i got a lot of criticism for that, but i think that is a legitimate thing that can be taken into consideration, how divisive that would be. i also think it has to be balanced against the notion of accountability, and really most importantly, deterrence. we cannot allow what happened on january the 6th to go unpunished, because it would invite something like that to happen again in that future. future people who would consider doing something like this have to be deterred. >> i want to follow up on that, given some of the racism we see around the country. you talk about public corruption. it's not like the department of justice has never indicted politicians before, in fact it happens frequently. i practice journalism in chicago, where it happened nearly every week. you have profile prosecution of the district attorney for baltimore, also a politician. this kind of thing happens. there is a kind of institutional calculation.
any place where we're going to bring a high-profile corruption case against an elected official. what is the thinking there, in the general sense, even when you're not talking about somebody as high-profile as donald trump, about how you think through a case like that? >> i think the president is fundamentally different from almost any other, any other person, any other office, in terms of thinking about what the collateral impact our. if you're going to think about the vice president, maybe those kinds of considerations into your mind as well. i don't mean to say that because he is president he is beyond reach, or because he was president he is beyond reach. but taking into account what a national impact, what a potential case would be, it's certainly something that could be legitimately considered by the prosecutor who has to make that ultimate determination. i will having said that, and understanding that this is going to divide the nation, i
think a non-prosecution would divide the nation as well. if we don't have that deterrent impact coming out of the consideration of what happened on january 6th, we put this republic at risk in the future. >> i've said this before in the program. coups happen in certain place, or attempted self coups. they've happened throughout history. they happen in different countries in different regions. they tend to go one of two ways. they are successful, in which case people seize power and could do whatever they want, or they're not successful in the people that fail, they tend to get arrested or worse. it's not that often you get an attempt and then it doesn't work out and everyone just says well -- which is a bit like what is happened here. you see it in the crop of republican candidates. doug mastriano is going to be gubernatorial nominee in pennsylvania. he actively talked about seeking to replace the electors do elected by the people of pennsylvania. i just wonder what you think. you are someone
very focused on democracy, what it says to you about the fact that doug mastriano can occupy this position two years after this happened, or a year after this happened. >> i think that says a lot of really disturbing things about the republican party. the notion that a person who was actively engaged in what happened on january 6th, whether he went in the building or not, a person who says that the election was stolen, that there was fraud, when in fact there is no proof at all the debt is in fact the case. the person who appears to want to substitute, donald trump for him as a substitute for the elected person, should not be the next governor of pennsylvania. my hope would be that that would be a central part of the campaign. democrats need to focus on this. we need
to be the pro democracy party up and down the ballot. that needs to be talked about regarding people running for governor, senator, for other elected offices. every republican needs to be asked, do you think that joe biden is legitimately elected president of the united states? or do you think that the election was stolen from donald trump? they need to be forced to answer those questions. >> you've got a new book out about voting rights, which find themselves in a very perilous situation right now. you've been involved in redistricting, which is related to that. i want to ask you to stick around, and that's all right, we're gonna talk about that right after this break.
across the country, both parties are doing their best to make sure the electoral map is favorable. except there is a huge asymmetric. only one party is respecting the courts and the rules. in ohio, as we have covered, the supreme court has struck down republican drawn maps several times, but rather than respect the court, republicans have stalled for time to keep the current gerrymandering map in place, as long as it can. perhaps steamroll the courts. meanwhile in new york, democrats had their map also struck down, but the move map that the democrats have accepted, issued by ace courts special master, is five groups of incumbent democrats against each other. it might end up costing the democrats control of the house of representatives. still with me tonight, former attorney general eric holder who is now the chairman of the democratic district committee, working to create fair district for democrats. his new book is titled our unfinished march. we
have this really crazy situation, you got this in florida, they struck down the maps, their facially unconstitutionally, desantis is trying to keep pushing them through. in ohio, they basically have a stare down with the courts, where is in new york, the got struck down. this seems like an untenable situation to me, if you only had one party listening to court decisions about fair maps. >> we will see with the final maps look like in new york, i guess tomorrow or the next day. the democratic party needs to stand for the rule of law, we have to fight republicans, in ohio, who are basically not paying attention to the supreme court there. we have to bring lawsuits when we can, and try to make sure that we do all that we possibly can to have a system where politicians are not picking their voters. where citizens are choosing their elected representatives. that's a difficult thing. it's something that i have been fighting for since 2017, but i am not saying that we should be for unilateral disarmament. we should be fighting for fairness, and i think that we fight for fairness, and we get fairness, democrats and progressives will do just fine. >> your latest book, a history of voting rights and an examination of the perilous situation that we find voting rights in in this country. i
was thinking about the book when i saw the gop color it -- listen to this. he wants to get rid of one person, one vote in colorado, and basically make a colorado electoral college that would give more weight to rural counties. one thing that i think we're seeing is a move away from the basic fidelity to democracy. one person, one vote. at an ideological level, across the conservative movement. what do you make of that? >> republicans are just not that into democracy. that's the reality. we have to confront that. in the book, we talk about how people of generations past fought for our democracy, did all they could to save our democracy, to enhance our democracy. we talk about a young woman named alex paul,
who is beaten as she walked down pennsylvania avenue in 1913 for women's rights to vote. she was one of the suffragettes. she was beaten by a guy named thomas door, who -- so that white men, white men without property, could have the right to vote. there are a bunch of interesting stories in the book. in reality, we also have the present day situation is. with the democracy is under attack, our democracy is that peril. unless we have the kind of courage that alex paul, thomas door exhibited in the past, as well as the other people in the book, we could lose our democracy. the reality is, democracy was lost in many countries in europe and the
20th century, the earliest part of the 20th century. not because fascism was strong, but because the defensive democracy was weak. and that can happen here. unless we do the necessary things, sacrifice, as those before us did. commit ourselves to the kind of concrete proposals that we have in the book. our democracy can be irreparably harm's. >> when you say defenses being weak, but does that mean? part of the issue here is that democracy is often and abstract enough concept that it is hard to mobilize electorates for it. you can mobilize electorates around cultural issues, you can mobilize them around material interests, as we talked about in the opening block of this program. but preserving democracy is a hard thing to mobilize as an electorate. how do you conceive of defending it?
>> you have to attach democracy, you talk about democracy as a concept. we have to reduce it to really concrete things. if you think about all of the furor that we see, and think about the fact that that came from the cases that are being considered by the supreme court. they came from gerrymandering state legislatures, where even in the most conservative states, people do not want to see roe v. wade overturned. because you have these partisan and racial gerrymandered rather just lighters, they can pass bills like these anti choice bills, inconsistent with the desires of the people. and yet the people who pasty this, the
legislators the past them, face no political consequences. they're saying you should dump and -- if you care about climate, if you care about a woman's right to choose, if you care about protecting the right to vote, all of these things. all of these things are directly connected to making sure that our system of democracy works. >> eric holder's new book, the violent past and paroled feature of the vote. former attorney general, eric holder, thank you for making time. >> thanks for having me. >> next up, shockwaves through the democratic party after the congressman tasked with getting more democrats elected, decides to abandon his district and ran against his own colleague. i will not get over the story, i'll explain why after this. after this.
it's time for our memorial day sale on the sleep number 360 smart bed. it senses your movement and automatically adjusts so you both stay comfortable, and can help you get almost 30 minutes more restful sleep per night. save $1,000 on the sleep number 360 special edition smart bed, queen there is a chaotic situation now only $1,999. only for a limited time.
playing out right now in new york, as the status still trying to finalize its new map of congressional districts. last month, the court of appeals for the state struck down a map drawn by democrats ruling that the maps violated a state ban on partisan gerrymandering. as i noted, unlike in states like ohio, republicans -- new york democrats are basically just sucking it up and obeying this ruling. that has left them scrambling with candidates still unsure where they are running, and the congressional primary postponed until august. on monday, the court appointed special master released a revived draft a map that through to everything into further disarray. under the newly proposed lines, -- would be pitted against each other in the same district. and in the wake of this new map, we have
seen action from one member of congress. i have to say, it is one of the most egregious political malpractice's i've ever seen in my life. here's the deal. democratic congressman sean patrick maloney represents -- he's also the chair of the democratic congressional chair committee, that is a big job. his job is to help democrats win midterm elections this year, he's tasked with helping fund-raise, message, and strategize for the democrats in tough races. that is a really hard job, and i do not envy him. i praise him for taking it on. it's kind of thankless. in this new draft map, the 18th district that sean patrick maloney currently represents is being redrawn. on the left, and it has the right, is a new proposal. it covers around 70% or more of maloney's current constituents. it's still his district. here's the thing, this new version which has more than 70% of his current district no longer
includes his home. members of congress are not required to live in their districts. in 2020, the 18th district that sean patrick maloney represents voted for joe biden by five points. the newly redrawn version would be -- okay. within half an hour of this new map being released, sean patrick maloney announces on twitter that the maps are finalized, he will in band in his current district, and run instead in the neighboring redrawn 17th district. but the 17th district already heads a sending to his name is mondaire jones. a black man, freshman, now facing a primary from the head of the dccc, the person whose job it is to keep the democratic majority by winning difficult races. according to politico, as the draft map stance, that 17th district is an easier one for democrats, it supports joe biden by ten points. two points more favorable than the 18th, which sean patrick maloney now represents. rather than putting
his money where his mouth is and running in the slightly hearted district, sean patrick maloney is banding in it. even though he says he is only shifting district because of where his home is. >> i am the only sitting member who lives in the district which is now outnumbered new york number 17. it remains a competitive district that we have to win in the fall. from my point of view, i'm running where i landed. >> okay, but maybe you could've waited more than 25 minutes to announce that. be, you don't have to run in the district you live in. and see, your decision puts a freshman democrat at risk. who is going to run the 17th? that decision has prompted a lot of criticism. if he primaries his freshman colleague. she called a decision terrible, hypocritical, and said it absolutely further imperils our majority. san
patrick maloney did not even give me a heads up before he went on twitter to make that announcement. and i think that tells you everything you need to know about sean patrick maloney. full transparency, as i've said before, my brother works for the representative of the 16th district. he is also implemented in this chaos. mondaire jones could move to the 16th district, and primary the incumbent there. to be honest, it's very hard to keep clear of this conflict, so hard that i normally don't even talk about anything that has to be done with jamal bowman at all. i don't -- my brother worked for him. this is such an outlandishly agreed this thing to do, i seriously cannot believe it. there are a few things that might happen. tomorrow, when the draft maps are finalized, maybe summer vision before then. or maybe sean patrick maloney will be embarrassed by the fact that he does not have the courage of his own convictions. rick decide to remain in the 18th district, and hold the seat for
the democrats. we invited him to come on to the show, congressman maloney to talk about redistricting in new york. his office told us that he is traveling today and tomorrow, and referred us to the comments that he made earlier this week. russian president vladimir putin ordered his troops to order -- it's clear that one of his goals was to make sure that ukraine did not join nato. stopping nato has big's expansion has been a specific goal of his, earlier this year he said that any possible membership with nato and ukraine would undermine russia's security. calling misses a launchers in russia --
if you're a small business, there are lots of choices when it comes to your internet and technology needs. but when you choose comcast business internet, you choose the largest, fastest reliable network. you choose advanced security. and you choose fiber solutions with speeds up to 10 gigs available to more small businesses than any other provider. the choice is clear: get unbeatable business solutions from the most innovative company. get a great deal on this limited time price with internet and voice for just $49.99 a month for 24 months with a 2-year price guarantee. russian president vladimir call today.
putin ordered his troops to order -- it's clear that one of his goals was to make sure that ukraine did not join nato. stopping nato has big's expansion has been a specific goal of his, earlier this year he said that any possible membership with nato and ukraine would undermine russia's security. calling misses a launchers in russia -- when sweden and finland started to show interest in joining nato, kremlin spokesman told the alliance remains a tool geared towards confrontation. russia's foreign ministry spokeswoman mourned of military and political consequences. that did not deter finland and sweden have announced over the weekend that they had made their decision and would like to join. they present -- and the this prime minister in a rose garden ceremony, showing high levels of support for their applications to join the
defense of the lines. >> today, i am proud to welcome and offer the strong support of the united states. for the applications of two great democracies. and to close, highly capable partners to join the strongest, most powerful defensive alliance in the history of the world. two proud independent countries. exercising the sovereign rights that all states possess, to decide their own security. >> the former u. s. ambassador to nato is with us, he's now -- he joins me now. the strikes me is a pretty big deal, what do you make of it? >> it is a tremendous deal, one, because of the reason you mentioned. flatter made putin went to war obstinately, in order to send a message to nato to not come closer to russian borders. finland, which has an 830 mile long border with russia, once it becomes a measure, will double the border between nato and russia in one fell swoop. and secondly, it is
significant because these are two countries that for a very long time have maintained that they are not in alignment in the case of sweden. since 1814, they have not been part of any alliance, and they have been neutral into world wars. now they have decided that the threat that russia poses, that we see in ukraine, is such that they must be secure by being members of nato. it is a huge deal, both for nato, for these countries, and of course for vladimir putin. >> the russian response was notably very muted, finland and sweden bids posed no direct threat. they warned the western alliances into -- it does strike me that part of the calculation here also has to do with the military setbacks. they are now occupying the country, i feel like maybe the calculations would be different. with do you think? >> i think they're accepting something that they cannot do anything about, they can scream a lot, even threaten, which they have done before. the
reality is, there's nothing they can do to stop finland and sweden from joining nato. that's a decision for nato. the more he protests, and the more he threatens, the more likely that these countries will want to join nato. it is basically another indication that he has miscalculated, and he is starting to realize how badly he had miscalculated. we also expect him a few weeks ago the may 9th parade to announce a major exploration, he did not do that. here again, we see him stepping back and saying, well, nato it large mint is not a big deal. this whole war in the first place was coming to close to russia's border eye. think they just called him out, and he understands that. >> it strikes me as one of the lessons, particularly for finland and sweden, is that you are either under the nuclear umbrella under nato, or if you are not. if you're not, you're liable to be invaded. i think that shocked a lot of people, and european capitals, and
governments, even intelligence officials who said they didn't think it would be happening into the last moment, i do worry about, when you study world war i. the latticework of alliances would be the bulwark against war, instead what it ended up being would be opposite. a set of dominoes that pulled the entire continent into the war. the extension of the airlines creates more susceptibility to possible nuclear escalation. what do you say about that? >> you have to be worried about, it and one of the reasons you need to do a careful examination, and i hope they will do a careful examination when they consider and approve the succession of these two countries to nato. you have to look at what this does, does it in fans security of nato, of europe? to bring these countries in. does it diminish it? one of those issues is, are the chances of we're going to be going up or down? i think we, as you just mentioned, had a very good real life example. it turns out that when you apply for nato membership, and you are ignored for a long time, that vladimir putin is going to be saying, they're not going to take it seriously. we will
invade. not only did he invade, we told him that if we did, we would be coming to the defensive that country. finland and sweden decided they would not be in the same position, and we also learned the lesson that if you want to prevent war, being part of nato is a good thing. >> i think that the one conclusion that i've drawn from this whole thing. it's that the worst thing you can do is say that a country is on track to join nato, and then just have it hang out. the 2008 declaration, when she was pulled against him, many people thought there was a state, they present -- both of which ended up invaded, someday you'll join nato, but not now. you've got the worst of both worlds in that situation. >> absolutely. this is serious business, taking countries into
an alliance. it is not about politics or anything else. nato learned the lessons they learned in 2008, that you have to have a consensus before you make these moves. you have to have people agree. the problem was in 2008, there was no agreement on georgia or ukraine joining nato. in 2022, of play there is a agreement to bring nato and finland -- and apparently, croatia also saying, if the turks can play this game, maybe we can to. i think this is domestic politics in part, and trying to get the best deal possible. i don't think this is going to be an obstacle. in 2008, germany and france made very clear that they did not want to let ukraine into nato. you have to be clear. either you are willing to defend the country, in which case you bring on a kick quick path to go in, or you don't go on that path. hey everyone, i'm jamie
yuccas coming to you from our bureau in los angeles. >> that's one of the enduring thank you so much for joining us. lessons that we find herself in. here's a look at the top stories we're following right now. thank you very much, i appreciate covid cases on the rise nationwide. it. we'll talk to a doctor about why kids are particularly at risk during this new wave of that is all in on this thursday infections. appreciate it. that is all inin" on this on th thursday night. msnbc prime starts with mehdi hasan. good evening. >> i'mi for one am amused that vladimir putin has done more for nato expansion more than donald trump and joe biden put together. >> truly amazing how that works. >> thank ziyou, chris. have a great rest of your night. >> thank you. >> thank you for joining us at home at this hour, it is not a secret that president richard nixon had a big ego but he made a big bold whopping promise. >> president nixon told the white house conference today that america cannot live with is conscience if people are hgr
IN COLLECTIONSMSNBC West Television Archive Television Archive News Search Service The Chin Grimes TV News Archive
Uploaded by TV Archive on