Updated
Summary
Secret Service under scrutiny over missing 1/6 texts. Committee Chair Thompson tests positive for COVID. Roe v. Wade fallout puts patients at risk. Democrats fight to protect same-sex marriage. Families demand answers at Uvalde meeting.
Transcript
LAWRENCE O`DONNELL, MSNBC HOST: Beto O`Rourke got tonight`s “LAST WORD”. That is THE 11TH HOUR – THE 11TH HOUR with Stephanie Ruhle starts now.
STEPHANIE RUHLE, MSNBC HOST: Tonight, message send failure. The Secret Service can`t we`ll cover those January 6 text messages ahead of Thursday`s primetime hearings set to focus solely on Trump.
Then, as confusion grows across the country about abortion laws, we`ll take an inside look into how one organization plans to fight the restrictions in key battleground states.
Then, the bipartisan vote in the House to protect same-sex marriage. How will it play out in the Senate? Why do they even need to do it? As THE 11TH HOUR gets underway on this Tuesday night.
Good evening once again, I`m Stephanie Ruhle live at MSNBC headquarters here in New York City. As the January 6 committee gathers more evidence ahead of Thursday`s primetime hearing, the Secret Service is coming under some major scrutiny tonight over missing text messages from January 5th and 6th.
On Friday, the committee issued a subpoena for those messages after an inspector general notified them that they had been deleted. Today, NBC News learned that the agency now has said they have no new tax related to the attack to give House members, meaning they can`t find any of them. The Secret Service says they lost the text as part of a technology upgrade.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. STEPHANIE MURPHY, (D) JANUARY 6 SELECT COMMITTEE MEMBER: They received four requests from congressional committees in — on January 16, to preserve records. And they had this planned migration for the 25th, I believe of January. Nobody along the way stopped and thought, well, maybe we shouldn`t do the migration of data and of the devices. Until we are able to fulfill these four requests. Their process, as explained to us was simply to leave it to the agents to determine whether or not there was anything on their phones worth saving that was necessary to save for federal records. And as a result today, they have — they did not receive any texts from their agents when they made that transition that was flagged for preservation.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
RUHLE: The National Archives has asked the Secret Service to find out how in the world this has happened. Tonight, Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, whose department runs the Secret Service was asked about the missing tax from our own Trymaine Lee.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRYMAINE LEE, MSNBC CORRESPONDENT: Secretary, there`ll be a lot of people who say, sounds really convenient, is merging with information and all these important, possibly important technologies just disappear. Do you believe that this was just a good faith accident?
ALEJANDRO MAYORKAS, DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY SECRETARY: So the migration was planned well before January 2021. I think the facts will be disclosed. And we will address the facts as they are learned or continued to be learned. And we`ll learn from it and do what we need to do.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
RUHLE: I`m glad we have an expert panel here because his answer right there, I don`t understand a single word of it.
Meanwhile, January 6 Committee Chairman Bennie Thompson has tested positive for COVID. The panel says Thursday`s hearing will still go ahead. Two Witnesses expected to testify. Former Deputy National Security Adviser Matt Pottinger and Deputy Press Secretary Sarah Matthews, who both resigned from the Trump administration shortly after the insurrection. That hearing will be led by Democrat Elaine Luria and Republican Adam Kinzinger. Both military veterans.
Today they heard closed door testimony from a former White House aide Garrett Ziegler, who work closely with Trump ally and former Trade Adviser Peter Navarro.
The latest January 6 hearing will happen just about one mile for this guy Steve Bannon is on trial in federal court. He`s charged with contempt of Congress for refusing to comply with committee subpoenas for testimony and documents.
And as we learned today, the Georgia Grand Jury investigating Trump`s possible election interference sent subpoenas to nearly a dozen of Georgia`s fake electors. Those fake electors signed a document saying Trump won the election, even though of course, he lost in the state of Georgia. They are now fighting to block those requests.
With that, let`s get smarter with the help of our leadoff panel, a pair of Pulitzer Prize Winners from the Washington Post, Carol Leonnig, Investigative Reporter who has covered the Secret Service for years. In fact, she wrote a book on them. And Philip Rucker, Deputy National Editor, they are co-authors of The New York Times bestseller, “I Alone Can Fix It.” And Andrew Weissmann joins us, former FBI General Counsel, Former Senior Member of the Mueller probe, he was known as the Pitbull of the Mueller team. And he`s also a beloved dog dad and a law Professor at NYU.
[23:05:28]
Gentlemen, I have lots of questions for you. But there`s no way either of you are going first, because Carol. Carol Leonnig was the first to break this story today that the Secret Service, despite having deleted those text messages because of a system upgrade, they just can`t seem to get them back. Can you please explain this to us, Carol?
CAROL LEONNIG, THE WASHINGTON POST INVESTIGATIVE REPORTER: Well, it`s a bit of a mess. As I think I`ve said a couple times to you privately, the Secret Service decided months before and that is true what Secretary Mayorkas said earlier, decided months before January 2021, that they were going to do an upgrade of their cell phones. But in the midst of perhaps the most traumatic and chaotic historic month in any presidency, they decided to proceed with a reset of all of the agents and officers phones in the agency, which essentially allowed individual agents to decide whether or not to upload their cell phone texts were their tax government business, should they upload them, it was up to them.
And what happened was, almost all of them concluded they weren`t going to upload their texts. And therefore, really, Steph, critical pieces of evidence are now in the wind. And now they`re — the Secret Service has told Congress, they can`t provide them, they`re vanished.
RUHLE: OK, but Carol, they`re gone forever. Think about your own iPhone, right? When you delete something, it`s like you delete it, and then it`s in the junk file. And then it`s in the deleted file. Like there`s no way for this stuff to get retrieved. Come on?
LEONNIG: So you and I have a friend in common who will remain nameless for this moment who has sent out basically a request for information from every techie in the world to answer the question, can any of this be gotten back? And I`m not going to go down the road of what`s possible? I`ll tell you one thing that a reasonable and very prominent techie told me today, which is that any agent who had a communication on a text, which had iCloud backup, any communication with that person is recoverable. And that includes other people who wiped intentionally, super wiped, deleted, had their phone reset. So there is some portion that is conceivably recoverable.
The Secret Service`s mistake here was allowing individual agents to decide and also deciding to proceed at a time when they had questions from the January 6 committee, and they were in the middle of, you know, something that no one had ever envisioned, a historic attack on the Capitol and insurrection that minutes after it began, everyone knew would be the subject of 10 investigations. Don`t forget White House Counsel Pat Cipollone said we are going to be charged with every imaginable crime if we let this proceed.
RUHLE: And the whole Secret Service involved just decided to go mass delete. Andrew, do you think a lot of these agents are going to get subpoenaed?
ANDREW WEISSMANN, FORMER FBI GENERAL COUNSEL: Well, you know, I was thinking back to my time as FBI General Counsel, I should say, there has to be a massive inspector general investigation and heads need to roll in just even if you assume that this was not sort of intentionally trying to keep documents from this committee, the sheer incompetence of it. I mean, these — the idea that, as Carol said, you would leave this to individual agents, when you had a pending request. And as I understand it, actually several requests from Congress, and you didn`t have a litigation hold is unbelievable. That you allowed that to go on? And so yes, I do think that there will be a lot of people who get deposed to talk about what they had on their phones, what they didn`t have. And there are a whole slew of questions here, not the least of which is why it takes the Inspector General for this to be revealed. Why didn`t the Secret Service reveal it themselves as which they should have done if it was responsible agency, as we just heard, the first response from the Secret Service was to deny that this even happened, which not a good look, and to not take responsibility for what happened and then there`s a whole issue about what actually has been heard and turned over what — and if any agents actually preserved anything? I mean, the huge number of questions.
[23:10:06]
And finally, the ultimate question, can you get anything including metadata, which would just at least give you who is communicating with who, and potentially for how long, even if you don`t have the substance, so lots of — lots to be continued. But this is one of the, you know, unfortunate scandals. And they said, the only really bad part of this is, you know, obstruction can be wonderful evidence in a case when you`re actually looking at obstruction by the defendant. But here, you know, unfortunately, I think that the White House and, you know, arguably, Donald Trump will benefit if these documents are never retrieved.
RUHLE: Phil, I promise I`m going to get to you. But when Andrew brought up heads rolling, Carol, I have to ask you about James Murray. This is the guy who`s the Director of the Secret Service, who Trump put in this job, and he didn`t put him in the job in the beginning of his administration, it was year three, when Trump had learned how do I put my loyalists, my boys in these key positions. And lo and behold, James Murray, beginning of this month, resigned from the Secret Service, and he`s headed to Snapchat at the end of the month, the one place that specializes in deleted messages. What can you tell — or messages that disappear, excuse me. What can you tell us about him?
LEONNIG: Well, I`m glad you mentioned the point about the choice of Jim Murray as director in year three, because as Phil and I documented over and over again, by that year, Donald Trump had figured out how to move the levers. And what he had actually done was asked Tony Ornato to be his Director of Secret Service. And Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner also had a soft spot for Ornato. They felt that he was very, shall we say, helpful. He was very willing to accede to their demands. And Donald Trump wanted Tony to be his director. But Tony Ornato said, no, no, no, no, I`ll do another job for you. And please have my buddy Jim Murray, be the Director.
Many people who work in the Secret Service have said to me, Donald Trump figured out how do I get what I want from the Secret Service time and time again? How do I get campaigns during COVID spikes that are lethal? How do I get the clearing of the peaceful demonstrators for a photo-op after Black Lives Matter protests outside the White House? How do I get all this done? That is not so in any Secret Service Security book. I install the people who say yes to me all the time. And Tony Ornato was indeed one of the President`s greatest yes, man. And now he`s an illustration, Steph, of how politicized the Secret Service became during Trump`s administration, something Phil and I found in agency after agency.
RUHLE: Well, Trump got exactly what he wanted. And now this massive swath of deleted messages, maybe the greatest gift ever.
Phil, I know, the National Archives is now dealing with these text. Now, they have interest in them. Explain this to us and beyond them, demanding them. Are there any consequences here? I mean, how scary are the National Archives when they come after it?
PHILIP RUCKER, THE WASHINGTON POST WHITE HOUSE BUREAU CHIEF: I don`t know how scary they really are, Steph. I mean, certainly, there are consequences to the reputation of the Secret Service, which has suffered years of reputational damage, as Carol, first among every other reporter has been documenting with security lapses and other failures by the Secret Service. But this just kind of reinforces for people. This — the belief among many that the Secret Service in the Trump years at least summoned a secret service. And certainly the leadership of the Secret Service was politically tainted that these were people working for Trump and on his behalf instead of for the institution. And on behalf of the country in this just shows further doubt about that. And I think that is a long term damage for the Secret Service as an agency in terms of what sort of legal consequences there could be. I`m not certain perhaps others on the panel know what those could possibly be. But you know, if the texts are not recoverable, there`s not much that the archives is going to be able to do to get them.
RUHLE: Andrew, as long as we`re talking reputational damage, let`s talk about the Department of Justice. Every January 6 hearing is bombshell after bombshell, is this an absolute embarrassment for the Department of Justice? Shouldn`t they have revealed a whole lot of these things for the last 18 months and done something about it?
WEISSMANN: Well, I`m not sure they should have revealed it but they certainly should have done something about it. I personally think that it is a bit of an embarrassment as terrific as the department has been in prosecuting the sort of lower level people who attacked the Capitol and also making a case against the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers. Those are very complicated, difficult cases. That`s the plus side.
[23:15:25]
But in terms of taking on, you know, the politically fraught issue of going after people at the White House, you know, unfortunately, I think we`ve seen scarce evidence that that has been undertaken. And we`ve seen a lot more activity, both in Congress and in state, prosecution, that`s made headlines including today. Normally, that is the kind of thing that the Department of Justice leads on and doesn`t follow.
RUHLE: Phil, we`ve got two big witnesses we know we`re going to hear from on Thursday night. And for everyone who says these hearings are a partisan sham. These witnesses are former members of the Trump administration, right, former Deputy National Security Adviser Matt Pottinger. The committee has already heard from him privately, the fact that he`s going to testify live, what does that tell you?
RUCKER: Well, Steph, it`s pretty important because Matt Pottinger was not some junior aide at the White House. He was somebody at the president side, through many of the historic moments of the presidency. And in the run up to January 6, he`s a former journalist actually worked in Asia for The Wall Street Journal. But it`s a real national security wonk and rose quickly through the ranks in the Trump years to really take on a big portfolio on foreign policy there. And he became, according to our reporting, deeply concerned with how the President was reacting in the aftermath of the 2020 election, with the fraud claims that were just not true, worried about what it meant to stay working there and actually resigned the day after January 6. He was part of that resignation. He`s obviously out of the Trump fold now. And I think his willingness to testify live in the big primetime hearing, kind of tells you something about what you might hear from him. I would very much expect him to be not favorable to Trump in the way he answers some of these questions.
The other person speaking by the way, Thursday night is Sarah Matthews, who was a Deputy Press Secretary. She worked right under Kayleigh McEnany. She`s not a name that a lot of viewers would necessarily know. She was more of a behind the scenes figure. But she actually worked very hard on January 6 that afternoon to try to get the President to issue a call to his supporters to stand down, to go home. She was truly shaken by what she was seeing on television at the insurrection and the attack unfolded. And when the President refused to promptly take action and lead, she decided to resign. She went down to her desk, packed up her high heels and her other personal items and walked out the door never to return.
RUHLE: Carol, I got to ask you this, despite everything that we have learned not just over the last 18 months, but specifically throughout these hearings. Just today, we learned that Donald Trump urged the Wisconsin Assembly Speaker just this month to overturn Biden`s win in 2020. Is this a preview of a 2024 campaign? The fact — is Trump still on this, I won. I mean, give me a break.
LEONNIG: Steph, I think I`m going to quote an anonymous source I recently interviewed if I may, who`s described, you know, what they experienced in 2021, the walk up to the attack, the insurrection they felt was building and what their warned me was, blood will be in the streets in 2024 if Trump runs and loses, blood will be in the streets if Trump runs in 2024 and wins. There will be this incitement to violence in many people`s view, because this is a person who`s going to challenge the — every election is going to challenge the accuracy of things that are accurate. We`ve already seen that happened. And what is that going to stoke? Anger and fear and resentment among the people who believe what he is saying?
RUHLE: Well, then maybe this is time for that anonymous source with that ominous prediction to reveal him or herself and put democracy first. Hope they`re watching.
Carol Leonnig, Phil Rucker, Andrew Weissmann and of course, your dog, Innis (ph) who joined us this evening sleeping just — I mean, Andrew has a huge, beautiful apartment. We`ve seen it many nights. I just love the fact that when the cameras roll, Innis is like, yo yo yo, I got to get in there. I think it`s fantastic. All right thank you all.
[23:20:09]
Coming up, as House Democrats fight to protect abortion rights, one group is willing to build a firewall for abortion on the local level. What does that even look like? We`re going to ask the person building it.
And later more questions and anger in Uvalde after the blistering report on law enforcement failed response to the shooting. Texas State Senator Roland Gutierrez is here on what he is hearing from the families tonight. THE 11TH HOUR just getting underway on a very busy Thursday — Tuesday, I don`t even know what day it is.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:25:17]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PROFESSOR LEAH LITMAN, UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN LAW SCHOOL: The abortion bans and the fervor of the anti-abortion movement have a broad chilling effect on reproductive healthcare. What we are seeing is that just because a law does not explicitly prohibit a procedure, that does not ensure that the procedure will be available when it is actually needed.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
RUHLE: Roe versus Wade being overturned has disrupted health care across this nation. The New York Times reporting on a story of a Wisconsin woman who was turned away from a hospital while she was experiencing a miscarriage. By the time she found a doctor who gave her the appropriate medications. The woman had been bleeding intermittently for days putting her increased risk of hemorrhage or infection, not to mention the emotional distress.
In Washington, 17 House Democrats were arrested today and an abortion rights rally outside the Supreme Court this afternoon. But the immediate battles are happening in the States, which is why the ACLU is working to create a firewall to protect reproductive rights.
I want to bring in Kary Moss, she`s Acting National Political Director for the ACLU. Kary, thank you for joining us. I want to start with explain this to us, what would a firewall look like and what states you`re targeting?
KARY MOSS, ACTING NATIONAL POLITICAL DIRECTOR FOR ACLU: Well, first of all, let me say thank you so much for having me today. And let`s be clear, we are fighting right now for the political future of our country. And we are fighting for the personal safety, the privacy, the freedom to travel, the liberty of women in this nation.
We can`t look to the federal courts now. We have to look to the states and we are well positioned to do that with affiliates in every single state. A firewall strategy is basically going to be four big things. First of all, we want to protect the right to reproductive freedom in Michigan last week, we turned in over 750,000 signatures to put an initiative on the ballot in November that would enshrine the right to reproductive freedom to prenatal care, to reproductive health care for all Michigan women. We`re doing the same in Vermont, we want to enshrine a ballot initiative there to protect reproductive liberty. That`s our first firewall.
Our second is just defending the right in places like Kansas where the state Supreme Court has found a right to reproductive freedom in this state constitution. There is now an initiative on the ballot that would try to strip women of that right. We are fighting back.
Third, our firewall. We want to hold politicians accountable. We want to hold officials — elected officials accountable, get them on the record. And we`re focusing on district attorney races. Because district attorneys are going to be charged or have — with interpreting their state laws. And we do not want to see them filing criminal prosecutions. So in places like Shelby County, Tennessee, or Clark County, Nevada, Wake County, North Carolina, we`re asking candidates to put their position on the record and we`re looking at state legislatures, state legislatures are the ones who are going to be considering abortion bans, considering whether or not to recount their trigger laws, that those are old laws that were on the books that that now we`re back in effect. We want to hold them accountable and make sure that we hold elected officials accountable to voting for women`s reproductive health.
RUHLE: Many of these states that are restricting abortion, also coincidentally have made it harder and harder to vote. Does this firewall strategy account for that?
MOSS: Well, obviously everything turns on our right to vote and access to the ballot. So we are also doubling down on the right to vote in Michigan. Again, there is a an amendment on the ballot there that would make it easier to vote although Michiganders passed an initiative in 2018 to do that, we`re just going to kind of keep doubling down. You saw what happened in Michigan back in 2020 during the election, so yeah, voting rights are hand in hand. But at the end of the day, what really we need is for people to turn out to vote, right, to vote their values, to vote — to hold politicians accountable.
RUHLE: People are being denied care. I just said it before, for miscarriages, for ectopic pregnancies, because of these laws. They`re not going to the hospital seeking abortions. Did these patients have any recourse?
MOSS: You know, the human devastation is really unbelievable and we`re already seeing it in this New York Times story you just featured. We`re seeing chaos, we`re seeing unpredictability. We`re seeing needless harm to the most vulnerable. We know that marginalized women in particular are going to be most affected. Black women are two times more likely to die in childbirth. So these bands are already having a chaotic impact. And it`s just imperative, you know, that we get out and vote.
[23:31:30]
RUHLE: What are these bands doing to doctors who are legally performing these services following the law, I`m thinking about that Indiana doctor who followed the law. She reported performing an abortion on that 10 year old child who was a victim of rape. And she`s got that state attorney general, going after her. What is this doing to doctors across the country?
MOSS: I think we`re seeing a lot of confusion. And, you know, to that end, last week, the Biden administration re-issued an interpretation of a regulation from the Department of Health and Human Safety, reminding emergency hospitals that they — their emergency rooms have to provide health care to women. So clearly, right, you know, doctors are needing some protection and the ability to do their jobs. But in response, we`re seeing extreme actions that Texas Attorney General just filed a lawsuit over that reminder, just that reminder to provide basic health care to women coming in, need of reproductive health care.
RUHLE: Reissuing and interpretation. Do you know what that is? Confusing, about something that truly is life or death. Kary, thank you so much for joining us tonight. I really appreciate it.
MOSS: Thank you.
RUHLE: Coming up, after the Roe reversal, fears that same-sex marriage could be next. So today, Democrats and even some Republicans voted to protect it. Our friend Tim Miller is here on the split in the GOP, and what it means moving forward, when THE 11TH HOUR continues.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:36:43]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. MONDAIRE JONES, (D) NEW YORK: The far right six-three majority on the Supreme Court is on a rampage against basic freedoms.
REP. JUDY CHU, (D) CALIFORNIA: In the wake of the Supreme Court`s overturning Roe versus Wade, the doors have been swung wide open for unelected judges to further strip protections from the American people.
REP. SEAN MALONEY, (D) NEW YORK: And on the day, the Supreme Court decided we had equality rights for marriage in this country, a bunch of us stood in front of the court and sang the national anthem. Because it`s a beautiful thing when your country catches up to you whether or not every American, despite their race, or their sexuality, has the freedom to marry the person they love. It`s a simple choice.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
RUHLE: A very simple choice for Democrats, but maybe not for Republicans. Tonight, the House voted 267 to 157 to pass the Respect for Marriage Act, 47 Republicans joined all Democrats in support of this bill. But the situation could look much different in the Senate, where only one Republican senator has backed the bill thus far.
For more on this, I want to bring in Tim Miller, a contributor with Bulwark and author of the new book, “Why We Did It.” Tim, you`ve written at length about how you balance being both gay and a Republican. 47 Republicans voted for this bill, but 157 voted against it. How far is this party from where the country is?
TIM MILLER, THE BULWARK CONTRIBUTOR: It was really revealing, was it Stephanie? In a lot of ways, I think my former party got bailed out by the Supreme Court politically, because the country had been moving forward. The country had been moving on. And, you know, overwhelmingly there`s support for gay marriage in the country. If you polled the idea that, you know, my marriage should be an old by government, fiat. That`d be a very low polling number, indeed. But Republican politicians on this issue, and on a wide variety of issues are completely in league with the most insane parts of the base, you know, the 10%, 20% of the country with the most extreme views on the right. And so that`s why you get 157 Republicans today voting no. And it`s sad, I think — and I think that the Democrats showed, you know, this was one example of smart politics meeting good and righteous policy, because it forced these guys to go on the record. And a lot of them had gotten away with, you know, holding these unpopular views and private and not being forced to have to vote for them. And so I thought it was a smart move today, and hopefully, the Chuck Schumer takes it up in the Senate.
And I don`t know that there might not be 10 Republican votes. I know it would be gross for there to be 40, no votes – Republican no votes, but to get to 10 would be good. And I think that would bring a lot of certainty to families like mine.
RUHLE: OK, but could this not force Republicans out of office? When you think about how popular this is to the majority of Americans in some weird, perverse way, could this end up being a gift to Democrats, that you`re going to get scores and people out to vote in November who simply want to protect same-sex marriage, people who normally don`t even care about politics, couldn`t just kill Republicans?
MILLER: Yeah, I definitely think it could hurt them and again, I think again I think that`s — this is why this is an example of smart politics on the Democratic side meeting good policy.
[23:40:09]
Look, here`s one example, North Carolina, a House member named Ted Budd. He`s the Republican nominee for Senate. And he voted today no on this bill. And so hypothetically speaking in North Carolina, if red wave happened in November, it Ted Budd basically voted to say that a Republican government North Carolina could unmarry gay couples in the state. That is such a wildly extreme view that is not going to be popular in Raleigh. It`s not going to be popular in Charlottesville, it`s not going to be popular in most corners of the state, frankly. And so I do think that he then has given a campaign issue to Democrats who obviously right now are in a tough political environment and needed ones. I think it`s a big gift in North Carolina. If you put this vote up in the Senate, you might see the same thing happening maybe with Ron Johnson in Wisconsin, for example, or some other candidates.
RUHLE: I want to share what Ted Cruz said earlier today talking same-sex marriage. Watch this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. TED CRUZ, (R) TEXAS: Obergefell, like Roe v. Wade, ignored two centuries of our nation`s history. In Obergefell, the court said now we know better than you guys do, and now every state must, must sanction and permit gay marriage. I think that decision was clearly wrong when it was decided. It was the court overreaching.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
RUHLE: Okey doke, I made a mistake, he said that on Saturday, not today. Help me understand, who are the strategists talking to the likes of Ted Cruz saying this is a good move. You know, Ted Cruz likes big fat corporate donors, influential people on his side and sophisticated influential people and big fat corporations. They don`t like anything he just said.
MILLER: Yeah, and that`s another gift, again, politically speaking from Ted Cruz, because by saying that he thinks the court should overturn it that validates the fact that this is a bill that needs to pass, right? Like you`ve got some other Republicans out there saying like, come on, the court would never overturn gay marriage. And so they`re completely at odds with each other on messaging.
And look, I can tell you, Ted Cruz`s strategist Jeff Roe guide the very top of the game on Republican side. It`s hard to imagine this is what he wants Ted Cruz to be campaigning on right now. And I think that a lot of these guys get caught up in what`s happening right wing media, what`s happening at the base, that interview by Ted Cruz was on, you know, a right wing — with a right wing media outlet and, and they want the retweets, they want the engagement from the more extreme parts of the party and they are really cutting off their nose to spite their face in a midterm that should be good for them if they were just focusing on economic issues.
RUHLE: Well, he`s going to get the engagement from all over this country. And you can focus on economic issues because again, this is a complicated economic environment and as you coined the term, it is an annoying economy but one that is recovering after a devastating pandemic. Tim Miller, thank you.
Coming up, Texas State Senator Roland Gutierrez joins us. He is demanding more oversight in investigating the Uvalde shooting. We will ask him how on earth that is going to work in a state that doesn`t seem to want to do much? When THE 11TH HOUR continues.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:47:48]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MEHLE TAYLOR, ROBB ELEMENTARY SCHOOL STUDENT: This was the last dress that my all my friends saw me on. Most of those kids were my friends and I don`t want to go to your guys` school if they don`t have protection.
JAZMIN CAZARES, SISTER OF UVALDE SHOOTING VICTIM: How I`m supposed to come back to the school. What are you guys going to do to make sure I don`t have to watch my friends die? What are you going to do to make sure I don`t have to wait 77 minutes, bleeding out on my classroom floor just like my little sister did?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
RUHLE: The anger pouring in as families in Uvalde are demanding answers and solutions after the Texas Department of Public Safety launched an internal investigation two months after the massacre. Uvalde state senator Roland Gutierrez is asking, can the department be trusted to even review its own officers` response. He sent a letter to the state`s Lieutenant Governor demanding a Senate committee oversee that investigation. He said this, “To date, we have failed these families and my constituents are demanding a full accounting of the horrors of that day.”
With us this evening, Texas State Senator Roland Gutierrez. Every time I see you, I wish you weren`t here. But the story is only getting worse. Have you received any response to your request?
STATE SENATOR ROLAND GUTIERREZ, (D) TEXAS 19TH DISTRICT: No, not as yet unfortunately, Stephanie. I`ll be calling tomorrow and see what they think about what`s going on. But I think that what we all saw on May 24 is probably the most tragic thing we`ll ever see in our lives. And yet, the aftermath is just horribly insulting. Not just what these cops did or didn`t do with just what government has failed to do in Texas. And for DPS to put out a statement yesterday or day before saying, we`re going to investigate ourselves, why did they say that 54 days ago, 50 days ago or 40 days ago. That`s the state of the — of where we are in Texas right now. We have a state agency that wants to go out and be the guardians of themselves. And right now at this point, it`s just not satisfactory.
[23:50:01]
RUHLE: So why do you think a Senate committee would do any better, it`s not like the governor is spending a whole lot of time or resources looking into this?
GUTIERREZ: Yeah, no, that`s fair. We got a governor who`s, you know, stuck his head back at the bench in Austin. He`s not really willing to do much of anything. He hasn`t been out to Uvalde. He hasn`t talked to families. He`s refused to talk to families. The Republican mayor and I, who`s joined me in a letter is asking Greg Abbott, to come back out to people, to talk to people and give an accounting. Just face the facts in the facts are that DPS our state troopers, are just as responsible for the activities that went on that day is Pete Arredondo or the police or anybody else. We have officers milling around, doing nothing.
RUHLE: There is reporting out there that Police Chief Pete Arredondo could be losing his job that Uvalde officials have decided to terminate his position. Do you know that to be true?
GUTIERREZ: I talked to some officials today and they`re looking at it. And it`s hopefully by Saturday, they`ll have some conclusion. I think that you and I know what the answer should have been a long time ago. But I just don`t think that it should be exclusive on Mr. Arredondo. I think that people within the police department need a, you know, answer for what they didn`t do. I think people at the state troopers need to be answering for what they didn`t do.
As I mentioned to you yesterday, or there`s a police Texas Ranger walking around for 20 minutes, it seems on the phone, who`s he on the phone with? Who are the supervisors telling him not to go in? Why didn`t they say hey, get 10 of our other rangers out there or troopers and go in there and charge into that classroom because that`s what we`re supposed to do, because that`s what our trading says to do, it never happened.
RUHLE: Then, what it is like in Uvalde right now, tell me what it`s like in that community?
GUTIERREZ: People are just devastated. I spoke to Red Cross today, which is the father that spoke out at that meeting last night. He is — because it was the custodial parent of Usiah (ph). He was really it`s his uncle, but he`s been raising Usiah (ph) for last two and a half, three years along with his sisters. Just anger, frustration, because government is failing to listen, you know, they realize and recognize that I`m trying and they recognize that myself and others in government are running against brick walls when it comes to dealing with the governor`s office, when it comes to dealing with the Attorney General`s office.
But we`re going to keep moving, we`re going to keep moving forward. We are — the next steps for us are trying to challenge the expansion of what`s called a VOCA, which is Victims of Crime Act, try to get more benefits for people that haven`t gotten anything yet. Simply to tell some a family here`s two weeks of lost wages. That`s astounding. It`s just — it`s absurd. People can`t go to work, their children don`t want their parents to go to work, the surviving children. They`re scared to death. They don`t want their parents to leave their side when their parents go to take a shower. These are the stories that I get daily.
RUHLE: And I`m sure there are parents — those parents don`t want to leave their children either. Because remember on that day, all they did was drop their little kids off at school. State Senator Roland Gutierrez thank you for joining me tonight. I appreciate it.
GUTIERREZ: Thank you, ma`am.
RUHLE: Coming up, you don`t need me to tell you, hottest day ever. If you didn`t believe in climate change warnings before, you sure do now. So will world leaders listen to this wake-up call and take serious action? When THE 11TH HOUR continues.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:57:57]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What is Joe Biden and company doing rather than address the number one issue by far the economy and the cost of everything, he`s listening to his noisy environmental left.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The President is going to declare an emergency on climate change. What has happened in science that would lead you to need to declare an emergency?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Right.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: And what — it`s July, and it`s hot, but it`s not like something has changed.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
RUHLE: Yes, something has changed. The last thing before we go tonight, boiling point. Despite what some Fox News personalities think something has indeed changed.
Relentless heat waves are sweeping across the globe. This ain`t your average July, nearly 200 million Americans fell temperatures above 90 degrees today, and 40 million had highs above 100. Parts of California, the Central Plains and Texas reached highs from 105 to 114. In Texas, there`s no concern about the power grid and if it can handle the extra energy needs. The dry heat has also caused multiple fires and strained infrastructure, causing big problems like water main breaks. While across the pond to the historically cooler United Kingdom experienced its hottest day in history. The usual high there in July is about 75 degrees. Today, it reached 104.
And as if the heat on its own wasn`t bad enough, it caused multiple fires across the City of London shining firefighters. The unforgiving heat also made train tracks and runways unusable. Most of the U.K. do not have air conditioning. But climate experts say these extreme temperatures are the new reality.
The rest of Europe also experiencing record breaking heat that is fueling devastating wildfires. In Spain and Portugal, temperatures are now topping 114 degrees. More than 1000 people have died there and more than two dozen fires continue to burn. That is not a normal July.
In Paris, temperatures reached over 100 degrees. The heat wave is now headed towards Belgium and Germany where they expect temperatures to reach 104.
And back here in the U.S., the high temperatures will continue across the country throughout the weekend and into next week. So yes, as you heard earlier, President Biden is considering a climate emergency declaration. Now, the talks on advancing his climate agenda has stalled in the Senate. Well, given just today`s news, there are many, many reasons why this seems like an emergency.
And on that note, I wish you a good and hopefully cool and air conditioned night. From all of our colleagues across the networks of NBC News, thanks for staying up late with us. I will see you at the end of tomorrow.