Updated
Summary
A powerful hurricane headed for Florida`s west coast. Interview with Governor Gavin Newsom of California.
Transcript
CHRIS HAYES, MSNBC HOST, “ALL IN”: That is “ALL IN” on this Tuesday night.
ALEX WAGNER TONIGHT starts right now.
Good evening, Alex.
ALEX WAGNER, MSNBC HOST: Good evening, Chris. I love seeing Michelle Goldberg on the set.
HAYES: One of the best, one of the best.
WAGNER: I couldn`t look at her while she was doing that segment. But we`re thrilled that she`s here in the same room with us. Have a great night.
HAYES: You too.
WAGNER: And thanks to you at home for joining us this hour. We have a lot to get to tonight, including a major category three hurricane currently barreling towards the state of Florida.
As we prepare to see what type of toll that might take on Floridians, the January 6 Committee has postponed its next hearing which was set to take place tomorrow. The committee tweeted earlier today that in light of Hurricane Ian bearing down on parts of Florida, we have decided to postpone tomorrow`s proceedings while praying for the safety of all those in the storm`s path.
We will have more on both Hurricane Ian and the latest on the January 6th investigation later this hour.
But we start tonight with a major political battle taking place across the country. As of today, we are just six weeks out from this year`s midterms. Despite economic and historical trends that should favor Republicans, this election is shaping up to be closer than anyone expected. Thanks in large part to Republican extremism in states across the country.
From the Supreme Court`s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade and subsequent state abortion bans, to election denialism, to a cruel political stunt using asylum seekers, to book bans and censorship in the classrooms, Republicans are executing on a radical agenda. Those efforts are being led by red state governors. Governors like Texas` Greg Abbott and Florida`s Ron DeSantis, men who are pushing this extremism while they raise their own political profiles and jockey to inherit Trump`s mantles as leaders in the next generation of Republican presidential hopefuls.
On the other side of that fight our handful of Democratic governors, the people who are, in many ways, leading the charge against radical Republican policies. Chief among them is California Governor Gavin Newsom.
After surviving a recall election last year, Governor Newsom has come out swinging hard against Republican governors and stoking a few presidential campaign rumors of his own. The California governor is put up billboards in Republican-controlled states attacking their leaders` extreme abortion policies. He`s running ads in Ron DeSantis`s Florida, saying freedom is under attack in the sunshine state. And he`s urging residents to move to California.
This weekend, Governor Newsom took a trip down to Greg Abbott`s Texas to continue the campaign of calling out Republican governors. And otherwise making himself a thorn in the side of the right-wing.
While he was there, I sat down with him for an interview to Taqueria in Austin, where I asked him about his aggressive new strategy.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
WAGNER: You talk a lot about going on offense.
GOV. GAVIN NEWSOM (D), CALIFORNIA: Yeah.
WAGNER: And you have involved yourself in the business of Ron DeSantis and Governor Abbott here in Texas.
NEWSOM: Yeah.
WAGNER: What is the point of that? Of the billboards? What is the point of — I`m not going to call it trolling, but it sort of feels like you`re trolling Republican governors.
NEWSOM: Well, they need to be called out. They shouldn`t be able to get away with it. They can`t claim to be pro-life when they`re just pro-birth. They can`t claim to embrace and celebrate freedom, where they`re denied freedom for women and girls and reproductive rights. They can`t attack vulnerable communities without being called out.
How do they — how possibly they`re being celebrated and successfully in terms of political ambitions because they both ascended even further and closer to their reelections as a consequence of their demonization, how are they getting away with that?
And so, my frustration is, you know, we need to call them out.
WAGNER: Yeah.
NEWSOM: Are you paying attention to what these guys are doing? How many books have been banned here in Texas? Eight hundred and one books have been banned.
Ron DeSantis is arresting elected officials. He is sending SWAT team with people in their underwear at 6:00 in the morning because they registered to vote and voted.
WAGNER: Yeah.
NEWSOM: That`s insane. Think about — just — that`s insane.
He went to another state to find migrants and use state money that was intended for unauthorized immigrants, not those seeking legal asylum. And send them to an island.
And he`s being celebrated for that. He`s literally rewriting history. Literally.
Did you see him the other day trying to describe his own version of history as it relates to slavery?
GOV. RON DESANTIS (R), FLORIDA: It was American Revolution that caused people to question slavery. No one had questioned it before we decided as Americans that we are endowed by our Creator with inalienable rights, and that we`re all created equal.
NEWSOM: He doesn`t know he`s talking about, except he is successful. And we need to be more assertive to wake folks up. It`s not just Mar-a-Lago. It`s not just Trump on January 6th.
Because, I mean we all hope that Trump goes to the ashbin of history and we can turn the page on Trump. But then what? I mean, Trump is — this is a whole other level. These guys are at another level of demonization.
[21:05:01]
WAGNER: Yeah.
NEWSOM: I mean, they`re in another level of implementing and applying that demonization through legislation. Trump has to be blushing with some of the stuff that some of these Republican governors have gotten away with.
WAGNER: You filed an appeal, basically, a notice with the DOJ, saying you think that there should be criminal investigations relating to the migrants.
NEWSOM: Yeah.
WAGNER: Do you think that DeSantis and Abbott could be criminally charged for this?
NEWSOM: I don`t know if they could be criminally charged. I grew up in a different world.
WAGNER: Yeah.
NEWSOM: I`m old-fashioned about accountability. But — I mean, by every definition, he broke state laws as it relates to the utilization of those state dollars. The question is, did he break federal law?
It`s sick. It`s — I mean, I`m a parent — man, I mean, how — how do I explain that to my — forget the Democrat, Republican, us versus — it`s like what? Someone did that? They would do that to kids, to other people`s kids? To human beings? What kind of person does that?
WAGNER: The NRSC is sending out emails saying, which state would you like migrants ship to next?
NEWSOM: Air DeSantis. Yeah, this bravado, ma — you know this toughness. You know, it`s all BS. They`re bullies. Nothing more than bullies, rank bullies.
WAGNER: Why the desire to have these strong then? Is it a desire for autocracy?
NEWSROM: Bill Clinton said decades ago, right, when we got shellacked to one of the midterms, said, given the choice, the American people always support strong and wrong versus weak and right, and there was truth then about that, there`s truth today about that. This desperate demonization has political benefits. It worked. It worked situationally.
And that`s what`s so sad, but now, it`s weaponized at a whole another level with this feedback loop of social media and then, of course, the propaganda networks and the anger machine, which, of course, the right dominates and we have nothing — respectfully, nothing comparable.
My awakening all this is it`s not just about midterms in Congress or 2024, or Biden will vie and won`t. It`s deeper than that.
The rights revolution, what we`ve taken for granted last 50 years is being wiped out in real time state after state. And they have intention. They`re focused. And they will stop at nothing to achieve their goals of rolling back all of these rights, and they`re doing it successfully.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WAGNER: During our interview, I also asked Governor Newsom about what he thinks Democrats should be doing in this moment to combat Republican policies and push back against the torrent of misinformation that`s being pushed out by the right wing.
He also discussed some of the pointed criticisms he`s directed at his own party.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
WAGNER: The right wing has been formulating this stuff for decades. They have a structure of leadership that`s been incredibly effective.
NEWSOM: Yeah.
WAGNER: And there isn`t an analog on the left.
NEWSOM: No.
WAGNER: I look at what you did and what you were saying in the wake of the Dobbs decision, you were out there saying —
NEWSOM: Where is the Democratic Party? Where`s the party? Why aren`t we standing up more firmly, more resolutely? Why are we calling this out?
WAGNER: How lacking are we at the national level in the Democratic Party?
NEWSOM: I mean, there`s no doubt states are on the front lines of the rights battles, period, full stop. And the Supreme Court now has made that crystal clear. We`ve honed ourselves and focused our energies perhaps more distinctively in that respect. But we have a messaging problem. I really believe it.
And you can argue, what are we doing on comprehensive immigration reform? What are we doing in a number of other issues? I`m not going to deny substantive challenges our party has as well, addressing those tough and taxing (ph) issues.
It`s not just a messaging problem but a messaging problem that has persisted with our party for years and years, constantly on the defense. We allow these culture awards to take shape and we consistently there on the back end of them.
Eight of the top states with the highest murder rates all are Republican states. How do Democrats not know that? In fact, it`s really nine out of 10, Georgia went for Biden, but it`s really a Republican state or at least a red state, eight out of ten, and we`re losing that message?
Crime is higher as well as taxes here for the average citizen in Texas. It`s higher, crime higher, violent crime and poverty crimes than in the state of California. Sixty-seven percent higher gun death rate in Texas. Why don`t we push back? Why are we —
WAGNER: Why don`t? Why don`t we deal with it?
NEWSOM: I don`t know.
In terms of my current point of view, I`m optimistic about our ability to turn this around if we go on the offense. That`s why I built the billboards. That`s why I`m doing these ads. That`s why I`m doing these TV commercials in other states, take it to them and take it to that damn social media network, whatever that thing`s called, True Social, which by the way I can`t imagine it`ll be around more than — two (ph) years.
WAGNER: Have you seen a difference since you`ve started doing this? Since —
NEWSOM: Yeah.
WAGNER: What — how — have you — have you — how is it impacting the same thing?
NEWSOM: I think we`ve stressed the debate a little bit. I mean, they`re like, oh, look at over there. Hey, well, I`m not that, but now, people are lean — I`m talking to other governors, and some of my friends, some are becoming closer friends saying, I wish I could do that. I really like that you did that or oh I can`t —
[21:10:02]
WAGNER: What are they worried about?
NEWSOM: You know, I`m in the middle of election. I got my own issues. I mean, that issue is just —
WAGNER: You`re in a middle of election.
NEWSOM: I get it. It`s different — you know, there`s different politics for me, but increasingly or, boy, let me just get through November. I really want to talk to you in the transition, let`s go.
I mean, I cannot — by the way, on my mother and dad`s grace, I cannot tell you the number of elected officials in powerful positions, soon to be, of influence, that are ready to go. I think — I think we`re in we`re entering a different, and you`ve seen it with Biden. He`s moving — he`s been willing to iterate.
WAGNER: Yeah.
NEWSOM: He`s willing — he`s — you know — he`s done on the policy, but now he recognized, they`ve always recognized, but now, they`re leaning in on the narrative.
WAGNER: Well, let`s talk about that for a second. Biden came out — a Joe Biden that I think Joe Biden think — did not think he would ever see —
NEWSOM: No, no.
WAGNER: — which is Joe Biden standing there talking about how MAGA Republicans, which by the way is a lot of Republicans, have become semi-fascists, that they`re in the thrall of autocracy, you know?
And the after effects of that speech were complicated for Joe Biden, right? I mean, there are Republicans who watch that and said, you have forsaken the Grand Old Party. You`re not the leader of the entire country. This is outrageous. They fundraised off of it.
The more you use pointed language against Republicans, the more you troll them, the more you take it to their doorsteps, I think that`s probably good for Democratic policies and priorities and politics, but what does it do to the ability of anyone to bridge a gap between left and right? Does that even matter anymore? Is that a fool`s errand?
NEWSOM: At the moment is my humble opinion, and I think the president`s learned it the hard way. I mean, he`s hardwired for a different world but that world`s gone, and he`s acknowledged that very publicly on multiple occasions. But you`re right, I think it`s very hard for him because his decency, his honor, his character is more persuasion.
I mean, he bought all those things, those were tools in his toolkit and said who he is as his core, he wants to compromise. He wants to find our better angels and he wants to find that sweet spot in terms of advancing our collective vision and values, but that`s not how the system is designed. That`s not what the Supreme Court represents right now. That`s not what all these redistricting efforts and the voting suppression efforts represented right now.
It`s not what all the rights that are being rolled back in real time, boy, my mom was still alive, she`d be very upset with me. Berlinian (ph), I`m just like, I`m so glad she`s not. She`s like, you just have to model better behavior.
Well, we`ve been doing that and people are losing their rights. People are losing their rights. I can`t sit back — you`ve got to push back. We`ve got to hold them accountable and yes, we prepare ourselves for the great reconciliation.
And that`s to come because we —
WAGNER: You think? Really?
NEWSOM: For no other reason, we can`t live like this. And at the end of the day, we run into each other at the grocery store. It`s like —
WAGNER: But —
NEWSOM: You know, we see each other at the soccer games.
WAGNER: I just wonder if we are going to be sharing the soccer field and the grocery store aisles. I mean, the tit for tat between you and Governor Abbott, and to some degree you and Governor DeSantis is, you guys can live over here, you guys live over there? And I wonder if that does worry, the sorting of people into red states and blue states, which will even further deepen partisan divides. I mean, is that a good outcome for the country?
NEWSOM: No, it`s not a good outcome, because at the end of the day, you can`t wall each other off, can`t wall — I mean, you just can`t. I mean, no, he could geo-fence yourself off on social media and live in that parallel universe, but at the end of the day, you know, we all share the same — you know, a lot of same things in common, right?
One short life, with pretty limited wisdom, small world, and we`re going to bring the same air, and at the end of the day, we`re going to rise and fall together.
WAGNER: How do you capture that shared humanity? How do you bring people back to the things that ties together rather the things than the things that separate us if you also want Democrats to go on the offensive and be angry and be motivated by the fear that the walls are closing in and that freedoms be basically taken for granted for the last 50 years may be evaporating for our eyes?
NEWSOM: I mean, we`ve got a situational responsibility to meet this moment and be as aggressive as possible situation, and then we have to have a sustainable mindset in terms of winning these larger debates. You can`t win fleeting victories at other people`s expenses.
WAGNER: Have you talked to DeSantis or Abbott?
NEWSOM: Abbott, where I thanked him a few years ago on multiple occasions for helping us each way with wildfires, didn`t play any politics and I would never play politics if he ever need anything along those lines. DeSantis, no.
Most of the Republican governors, I have great relationships with, spend time with them. In fact, some of my work — close Republican — colleagues are Republicans.
WAGNER: Some of your best friend or the best friends are Republican.
NEWSOM: And, of course, yeah, Republicans. So, I`m — you know, I`ve had an interesting life, you know? I mean, in that respect. And, you know, you know, the awkward conversation around an ex-wife.
WAGNER: Yes, an ex-wife, Kimberly Guilfoyle, who`s definitely not a Democrat anymore.
NEWSOM: No.
WAGNER: Do you ever talk to her?
NEWSOM: Nope, not lately.
WAGNER: It must be weird for you.
NEWSOM: Yeah, of course. So, you have — but you — but you also understand, and that created, you know, we had a different relationship with Trump when I was governor as well.
WAGNER: Yeah.
NEWSOM: I mean, we had an interesting not as combative relationship.
[21:15:02]
Even though we went at it on a lot of issues, we also found ways to get along. So I say all that for no other reason it`s essential that we find those spaces.
WAGNER: But I got to ask you, you`re out there. You`re aggressive.
NEWSOM: Yeah.
WAGNER: You`re practicing a new brand of Democratic politics, and the people who are the titular heads of the Democratic Party at the federal level, Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, Joe Biden, white people in their 70s, do you think part of the reason that the Democratic Party hasn`t been as responsive and aggressive as it should be is because in part the generational difference between who`s leading at the federal level and who needs to be active at the state level?
NEWSOM: No. My hero Bobby Kennedy said, what the world needs are the qualities of youth, not a time of life, a state of mind, a quality of imagination. Joe Biden has that quality imagination. Nancy Pelosi does.
Look what they were able to accomplish the last two years. There`s proof — there`s demonstrable evidence of that and what they accomplished, what they achieved.
Plus, few more political masters than Nancy Pelosi in terms of being able to organize a caucus to get votes, we may never see like this — see anything like this again.
We have to broaden that focus, and focus on building this party institutionally across the spectrum and develop a more comprehensive narrative where we can take these great policies that we embrace and enjoy and take our vulnerabilities, and package them in a way where we can go on the offensive much more collaboratively and aggressively, using the tools at our disposal as we build the surround sound and build the apparatus that the other side has done successfully, clues after all, and reconcile the fact that we`re losing the messaging debate broadly state by state in this country.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WAGNER: And one final thing, at the end of our interview, I asked Governor Newsom about his own political ambitions and whether or not his recent offensive against Republicans is a prelude to maybe a future presidential run.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
WAGNER: Are you running? Are you — would you ever?
NEWSOM: Not — no, would you ever? Is this the would you ever? Would you ever?
WAGNER: Would you — will you? Do you? Is this all part of a plan?
(CROSSTALK)
NEWSOM: Yeah, this is all part of a strategery, strategy.
WAGNER: Well, come on. You`re taking billboards out. You`re not — you`re definitely using your national profile.
NEWSOM: It`s not the intention. My intention is to raise attention to these critical issues, on what is happening.
WAGNER: OK.
NEWSOM: I`m just telling you.
WAGNER: It`s not my intention is not a no. So, I`ll just —
(CROSSTALK)
NEWSOM: No, no, no, OK. We`ll start, let me ask your question. No, and then, no, and then no, no, no. No, and then no and no. How many cameras you have? No and then no.
(CROSSTALK)
WAGNER: At least that`s no for Iowa, and no for New Hampshire, no for South Carolina, no for Nevada? Okay.
NEWSOM: No.
WAGNER: I will play each time you`re in one of those states. That`s fine. I take what you are saying. I will take it at face value for now, Governor.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WAGNER: That is what he is saying now. Keep your eyes on Governor Gavin Newsom of California, everyone.
We have much more ahead this hour. We`re keeping an eye on hurricane Ian as the storm barrels towards Florida, prompting millions in the state to evacuate. NBC News meteorologist Bill Karins will join us for more on that.
But next, a surprising Republican lawmaker has just given his support for a piece of legislation that may very well prevent another January 6th style situation from happening again in Congress.
Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[21:23:08]
WAGNER: Now here is something you don`t see every day, if you over consume political news as I certainly do, you know that this is an unusual site. This is Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell joining other senators on the dias at a Senate committee meeting. Senate majority and minority leaders do not sit on committees, that`s why you almost always only see them speaking from the floor of the Senate.
But on rare occasions, when a Senate leader feels strongly enough about a particular bill, he will show up personally to the committee meeting on the bill to show support.
And what made today a double rarity is that the bill that Republican leader Mitch McConnell schlepped down to that committee room to support is a bill that was the brainchild of Democrats. This bill aims to prevent future efforts to subvert presidential election results, basically to make it harder to do the kind of stuff Donald Trump tried to pull off on January 6th.
When Congress gathered to certify Joe Biden`s win on January 6, Trump`s allies in Congress objected to the slates of Biden electors that were submitted by certain states. Trump pushed the theory that Vice President Mike Pence as the presiding officer that day could then reject the Biden electors and essentially hand the election to Trump, which Pence refused to do rightfully.
This new bill would reform the 135-year-old Electoral Count Act to make clear that the vice president doesn`t have the power to do that and it would also make it harder for members of Congress to raise objections to a state`s set of electors. And this bill has been steadily gaining bipartisan support and now, Mitch McConnell`s full-throated blessing today his appearance in that committee room, all but assures that it will pass. I will note that there was one vote against this bill today and it came from none other than Ted Cruz, one of the Republican senators who objected to Biden slate of electors on January 6.
But except for Senator Cruz, the bill got unanimous bipartisan support from the committee members and that is something to really focus on, and it is a step toward preventing a repeat of what happened or almost happened in Congress on January 6.
And it comes as the latest trial gets underway for people charged in the attack on the Capitol that day. Jury selection began today in the trial of the leader of the far-right pseudo-paramilitary group the Oath Keepers. Stewart Rhodes and several his fellow Oath Keepers are charged with seditious conspiracy against the United States, multiple Oath Keepers and tactical gear entered the Capitol that day and some fought with police.
The indictment charges that they had stashes of guns and ammunition just outside Washington, D.C. that day ready to be deployed, and that Rhodes spent weeks coordinating a plan to use force to keep Trump in office. Obviously, the main question of this trial is whether Rhodes and his co-conspirators will be convicted of seditious conspiracy, which is a serious and rare charge.
But there are also questions about what more we may learn on January 6 — about January 6 and what happened on that day. Three Oath Keepers have already pleaded guilty to this edition`s conspiracy charge and are now cooperating with prosecutors.
As just one example of questions that remain, one of those cooperators told prosecutors that he overheard Stewart Rhodes trying to reach Trump through an intermediary on the evening of January but the person on the other end of the line wouldn`t connect Rhodes to the president. What was that about?
“The Washington Post” reports that investigators are still asking those Oath Keeper cooperators about their knowledge of any coordination between their group and the others on January 6th.
Joining us now is Barry Berke, who served as chief impeachment counsel to the House of Representatives at President Trump`s January impeachment trial.
Barry, thanks for being here.
BARRY BERKE, FORMER IMPEACHMENT SPECIAL COUNSEL: My pleasure, Alex.
MADDOW: So are you confident that through this Oath Keepers trial, we are going to get the information about the connection between these rioters, these seditious actors, and the Trump White House?
BERKE: I`m not confident that we`re going to get all the answers because it`s an imperfect case where they`re just trying to determine whether they can prove seditious conspiracy, but the evidence of the bigger role when January began much long before January when Donald Trump is speaking to groups like telling the Proud Boys to stand back and stand by, when people like Roger Stone — you saw his video — is closely aligned to the Oath Keepers, to the Proud Boys and is talking in July about the plan to prevent the peaceful transfer of government, you see the pieces and part of this defense reaffirms it, that they were there, that Stewart Rhodes was there because the president told him to come, that he thought they might invoke the insurrection act.
Now, that is not a defense to using violence to interfere with government. Not a defense at all, but it does lay the groundwork of how Donald Trump is guilty of a whole litany of crimes based on the facts that we know.
WAGNER: What about your line of questioning for Stewart Rhodes? We highlighted this — I — this evidence that we have that Stewart Rhodes was trying to connect with Donald Trump through an intermediary. That intermediary wouldn`t connect the two, the president and Stewart Rhodes, what would your questions be for Stewart Rhodes in a in a trial like this?
BERKE: If I could appear as chief impeachment counsel, my questions would be, who was that intermediary? Was it Roger Stone? What did the president say at the time, President Trump that caused him to think he should come and use force and commit crimes in order to prevent the peaceful transfer of power? Who are his earlier contacts with? All of these people who surrounded the president and were trying to prevent this transfer — of this peaceful transfer power, what role did they play with the Oath Keepers? How long did these tentacles extend out to other people who were involved?
And I think those were the questions I`d ask. If I was the prosecutor, I would just establish he came here intent on committing violence to prevent the certification of the election. That should be enough for conviction.
WAGNER: What — how does this dovetail with the DOJ`s investigation into January 6? Are they watching this and saying like basically creating a checklist?
BERKER: Well, I think it is a preview of certain things. There`s a whole litany of crimes that they have to consider whether or not to bring against the former president and those around them. The most serious is seditious conspiracy and they`ve laid out a strategy and a theory that could theoretically apply to a whole host of people.
However there are lesser crimes as well like interfering with an official proceeding. So I think the department is able to look at a case like this and see it as a preview to go up. Typically, the Department of Justice doesn`t stop at the low-level people who committed the acts but the people who planned it, who organized it, who are most directly responsible, the people who said the election was stolen and we have to prevent it, who went and used language of violence knowing a crowd was armed and was their intent to stop it, and then intended to march with them to the Capitol.
So I think the department has a lot of evidence, and I would tell you, Alex, I think the strongest argument often made, whether it`s the Oath Keepers or a former president is deterrence. And you have people now not only saying that they support overthrowing or interfering with an election but they`re running for office, serious office on that campaign.
[21:30:08]
So if you don`t prosecute a former president where the evidence is overwhelming that he knew he lost the election and sought to prevent the certification of that loss, then everyone is going to feel that they are at liberty to do the same.
WAGNER: Well, and it is meaningful that we talked about the Electoral Count Act. It`s a tacit acknowledgment that what happened on January 6 must never happen again, and one wonders whether a same group of Republicans will stand up if and when the DOJ pursues a criminal charge against primary actors. I`m not naming any names, right?
I do want to ask you as we try to put together a more sort of fulsome picture of what transpired that day. The Secret Service remains kind of to some degree a mystery, what was going on, we don`t have the text messages that were exchanged between agents on January 5th and 6th, and now, there`s a lot of reporting about the degree to which the inspector general of DHS who was charged with sort of overseeing what happened with the Secret Service and the missing text messages, there`s a lot of questions about whether he`s fully pursuing that investigation in the way that he should.
Let me first ask you. We have a trance of I believe 800,000 pages of evidence that have been turned over to the January committee in Congress. Are you optimistic that that trove of information as it pertains to the Secret Service will be useful? We know that the text messages are not among the documents that have been given to the committee.
BERKE: I`m hopeful that there will be something that help us helps us understand what communications were happening that day, right? The Secret Service, they were right there with the president. They`re supposed to defend him from physical harm, not from indictment. So there may be evidence that was — that were in the text messages that reaffirm what we already know, that Trump wanted to go to the Capitol and he was prevented, that he wanted to march.
So the fact that they were destroyed is greatly disturbing and if I represent people all the time that if they destroy evidence for something that is surely going to be investigated, they would be prosecuted for obstruction. So the issue is, was this done intentionally?
WAGNER: Uh-huh.
BERKE: Was it purely by accident? And if there is evidence that it was intentional or the act of it happening was covered up or somehow kept from Congress or not shown in a way that should have, that is serious. And not only does it interfere with the investigation but it attacks the integrity of our law enforcement.
The hope is this new material helps fill in the blanks. We already know a lot about what happened that day, but if we can gain more information of why the Secret Service was so concerned, that corroborates evidence we`ve already seen that is not in any way been conflicted that shows what Secret Service agents were saying that day, that could be very powerful in a case against the former president.
WAGNER: I think one thing for certain is the inspector general`s behavior and management of this Joseph Cuffari, this is — the examination of his behavior and what he has done or not done, that examination is not over no matter what is revealed in the 800,000 documents that the committee is now reviewing.
Barry Berke, who served as chief impeachment counsel to the House of Representatives at President Trump`s January 6 impeachment trial, we appreciate your expertise and wisdom and thoughts and game plan all of this, Barry.
Still ahead, extremism from groups like the Oath Keepers is not new, as Stewart Rhodes and others face trial for their actions on January 6. We`ll take a look at the misogyny and racism fueling their violent behavior. Law professor Anita Hill will join me live on set for that conversation.
But next, a live update on Hurricane Ian as it grows stronger and makes its way toward Florida.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[21:38:23]
WAGNER: Right now, hurricane Ian, a category 3 storm is churning over the warm waters of the Gulf of Mexico, barreling toward Florida`s gulf coast. Ian is gaining strength and is expected to make landfall on Wednesday as a category three or four. Early this morning, the hurricane slammed into Cuba, lashing the city of Pinar del Rio with heavy rain and 125-mile-an-hour winds.
New, tonight, Cuba`s electricity providers said the storm has caused the island`s power grid to fail, plunging the entire country into darkness. Officials expect it to be restored in parts of the island overnight and into tomorrow.
Meanwhile, Florida is under a state of emergency with about 2.5 million people under some form of evacuation order. On Florida`s gulf coast, people are stocking up on food and water and other essential supplies as they prepare to ride out the storm. Authorities say Hurricane Ian could leave parts of the state without power for as long as a week.
Joining us now is MSNBC meteorologist Bill Karins.
Bill, what can we expect from hurricane Ian over the next 24 hours?
BILL KARINS, MSNBC METEOROLOGIST: We can expect the damage to begin, which it already has and as you get worse tomorrow as the day progresses. This time tomorrow night is when we`re going to have thousands of people going in the dark, a lot of damage will be taking place right now 24 hours.
So I just got a report from areas right around Hollywood, Florida. We have a tornado threat from the storm. A private airport had a bunch of airplanes that were flipped, no one was in them, they were parked, but the tornadoes are a threat during the overnight hours and the winds are starting to howl.
This is as close as the storm is going to get to Key West, winds just gusted to 70 miles per hour, so that`s about as bad as it`s going to get in the Keys. Then we`re going to watch these winds increasing. When you wake up tomorrow morning, the winds will be howling from Fort Myers, all the way up to coast to Sarasota, and that`s where we expect the worst of this to hit.
[21:40:01]
So here`s the forecast in the hurricane center. The next update comes in at 11:00 p.m. Eastern, then the next one after that will be 5:00 a.m., every six hours.
They have that landfall right around 5:00, 4:00, in the afternoon, coming on shore somewhere just north of Port Charlotte, Punta Gorda, right around — Venice is right here, Englewood is to the south of there. I wouldn`t doubt if they shifted even a little more south.
I mean, this forecast just keeps creeping towards you, Fort Myers, Cape Coral, Captiva, all the way down here through beautiful areas around Sanibel Island. And then the storm as we go throughout you know all night Wednesday and then all during the day Thursday, this storm is going to be up here through Central Florida or Orlando, the Disney complex, those areas will have a lot of power outages, trees down and then even as far as, you know, Friday. We`re going to watch the storm hitting up the coastal areas and then we`ll have a storm surge to deal with as it makes a second landfill up here by Savannah.
It`s not going to be a hurricane by then still a tropical storm. But regardless, it`s still going to cause problems. This is at least three days in a row we`re going to deal with this storm.
The worst thing as far as life-threatening is water it always is with these storms. It`s not the wind that kills the most people. It`s the storm surge and the freshwater flooding, eight to 12 feet. Now, we don`t know exactly where that`s going to occur. It`s going to be just south by about 10 to 20 miles, wherever the eye makes landfall.
So this is the current forecast and if it goes up like this, areas from Sarasota, St. Petersburg, you`ll have a blowout wind. That wind will actually be clearing out to sea on the north side but it`s that southern an onshore wind it will pile up.
I`m very concerned with the storm surge from Naples to Bonita Springs and again, Sanibel, Captiva, Fort Myers, maybe even possible here around Port Charlotte and Charlotte Bay. That`s area, you have high tide tomorrow as we go throughout 6:00 p.m., that`s right when the highest water levels could be surging.
So we`re going to add the storm surge 8 to 12, and then another two to three feet high tide. So that`s like way up there somewhere. So that`s what we do not want to deal with and I mentioned some storm surge even there on the Jacksonville coastline.
And then finally, the other problem with water, high risk of flash flooding in central Florida. Someone`s going to get two feet of rain in that I-4 corridor. This does include you Tampa, all the way up through Orlando, back up towards Daytona Beach.
So, Alex, you get the idea. I mean, it`s the wind. It`s the water. When you have a major hurricane, you`re going to have a billion dollar weather disaster unless it hits like a totally unpopulated area. This is a highly populated area.
I mean, I wouldn`t be surprised this ends up being like a $10 billion weather disaster by the time it`s all said and done.
WAGNER: Terrifying, and it hasn`t really even gotten here yet.
MSNBC meteorologist Bill Karins, Bill, you are going to be a very busy man in the next 24 hours. Stay strong. We eagerly await your updates. Thanks for everything.
Up next here tonight, law professor Anita Hill will join me live in studio to talk about the thing that might be at the root of both restrictions on reproductive freedoms and threats against our democracy. It is not what you think. That`s next.
Stick around.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[21:47:23]
WAGNER: When Oath Keepers leader Stewart Rhodes was arrested and charged with seditious conspiracy earlier this year, his estranged wife said she was relieved. Before the insurrection, she says she had spent years directing his violence and rage at her and their children. Tasha Adams spent the past four years trying to sever ties with roads and finalize a divorce. In 2018, she filed for a restraining order saying she was afraid because, quote, whenever Stewart Rhodes is unhappy with my behavior, say I want to leave the house he doesn`t like me to leave, he will draw his handgun which he always wears, rack the slide wave it around and then point it at his own head, telling me my behavior has caused this. I filed for divorce a few days ago and am terrified of his response.
Adams filed that after she says Rhodes choked their 13 year old daughter. He only stopped when their son threw him off, according to the son`s account to a reporter. Then Rhodes challenged his son to a fight.
When Rhodes was finally arrested, not for assaulting and abusing his family but for attacking the capital and assaulting democracy, Adams tweeted this, quote: some — seems like a good time to repost that in the spring of 2018. My request for a protective order/restraining order against my estranged husband Stewart Rhodes was denied because the court didn`t believe me when I said he was a threat.
That is the man standing trial for seditious conspiracy, the man who helmed an anti-government paramilitary group that provided security for community businesses during some 2020 Black Lives Matter protests, a man who offered to send militia members to Kentucky in defense of the official who denied marriage licenses to same-sex couples, and who offered Oath Keeper services again on January 6th to overturn election results and keep Donald Trump in power.
The cost of denying the accounts and experiences of women like Tasha Adams and her children can be steep for everyone, but those denials happen every day, within families and in workplaces and even in courts. Very few people know that better than Anita Hill, professor of social policy law and women`s gender and sexuality studies at Brandeis University.
Most of America remembers her for the testimony she gave during the confirmation hearing for Justice Clarence Thomas. She spent the decades since researching teaching and writing about the gender-based violence entrenched in our Democratic systems and in our daily lives.
Joining us now is Professor Anita Hill, out today with a new paperback version of her book “Believing: Our 13-Year Journey to End Gender Violence”.
Professor Hill, thanks for being here today.
ANITA HILL, PROFESSOR OF SOCIAL POLICY: It`s a pleasure to be able to talk with you. Congratulations on your new show.
WAGNER: Thank you so much and thank you for being on this new show.
I just want to start with the sort of moment we`re in in American politics, where you have in particular today for example, a group of men, the Oath Keepers whose very existence as a group is based on homophobia, racism, misogyny.
[21:50:12]
You have groups like the Proud Boys also implicated in January 6, who call themselves proudly, pardon the pun, western chauvinists how. And why is this happening so publicly, articulated with pride, with zeal? Is it coming as a backlash to you know gains we`ve made in second wave feminism? I mean, what in society — what is the poison among us that has led to groups like this?
HILL: Well, I think you know in terms of patriarchy, if you will, you know, there has always been an element of misogyny. I mean, it`s belong that`s where it lives, there`s an element of racism, homophobia. We can — you know, all of those things are now coming together, and they`re part of this whole long list of white male grievances that we have in this country that have been directed at politics.
You know, I talk about some of the ways that misogyny is used to recruit people into white supremacist groups. People who may not have white supremacists sentiments, but who have misogynistic sentiments and they get brought in and now they not only have the misogyny, but now, they have, you know, they can be comforted and be part of a group and really be trained in white supremacy as well and you know, I wrote about it in the book because of the gender implications.
WAGNER: Yeah.
HILL: Because it seems to me very clear that this is not going to go away on its own, that where we are in this moment when we have these groups very proudly proclaiming this kind of animus toward people who are making progress in this country, who are taking leadership positions which apparently enrages some of them.
WAGNER: Yeah, and it`s not going to go away with us ignoring it and I think that`s what we`ve done so far. We`ve sort of put January 6 in one category and we put misogyny in one category and racism in another category, and really, there`s just this bitter relationship between it, and if we aren`t studying — if our agencies aren`t studying these groups, these extremist groups with all of that in mind, they`re going to be missing the point.
HILL: Do you see the Dobbs decision? I`ll set Clarence Thomas aside, but do you see the Republican zeal to control a woman`s body as an extension of that chauvinism? Obviously, pro-life groups will tell you this is about protecting the sanctity of unborn life.
But do you see show the same sort of chauvinism and misogyny that gives rise to all the Proud Boys and the Oath Keepers? Do you see an extension of that in the Dobbs decision and related state abortion bans?
HILL: You know, I see a lot in Dobbs and I`m going to go back to 2013, when Ruth Bader Ginsburg just a pair a phrase in one of our descents that said that her colleagues on — the conservative colleagues on the court were on this unrestrained course to corral rights in this country, civil rights in this country. And what she was talking about was employment discrimination specifically racism and employment as well as sexual harassment and employment.
And what she predicted was basically if we continue this path, we are going to be setting back precedent, that we have thought was there — with protections that we thought — we`re thinking, you know, we`re going to be with us forever.
WAGNER: Yeah.
HILL: And I think what we`re seeing with Dobbs is that that is it`s part of what she was complaining about, this — that this is a tendency of the left, or excuse me, the right, part of the conservative part of the court, to really limit and disrespect the granting of rights the extension of civil rights. So I don`t see Dobbs as separate from removal of protections for sexual harassment in the workplace, for example. For — and that`s what the — what Ginsburg was complaining about is back in 2013.
I just see this as following you know a pattern that she identified and that will continue I mean already in the Dobbs decision in the concurring opinions, Thomas`s concurring opinions, he`s given, as you vary in every indication that he was willing to hear LGBTQ right put on trial again, same-sex marriage put on trial again.
[21:55:22]
And so we know, we have — you know, we`ve had this message for a while but I think what we do have in this country is this tendency to try to divide and conquer.
WAGNER: Yeah.
HILL: And so — and we`re trying to divide rights to an abortion from the many other rights and you need and we need to see them all together.
WAGNER: Right, that`s not a question of the judiciary or the legislature or the gubernatorial races. It`s all intellect.
HILL: It is.
WAGNER: Professor Anita Hill at Brandeis University, thank you for your time. You are, of course, author of “Believing: Our 30-Year Journey to End Gender Violence”, which is out in paperback today. It`s so important to think about these issues holistically. Thank you for your time.
HILL: I appreciate it.
WAGNER: We`ll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
WAGNER: That does for us tonight. We`ll see again tomorrow.
Now, it`s time for “THE LAST WORD WITH LAWRENCE O`DONNELL”.
Good evening, Lawrence.
[22:00:00]