← The Last Word with Lawrence O’Donnell
The Last Word with Lawrence O’Donnell
Lawrence on Hegseth hearing: Trump has lowered the standards every day of his political life
00:41:15
Tonight on The Last Word: Pete Hegseth is grilled on his misconduct allegations in his confirmation hearing. And Jack Smith’s report of Donald Trump’s January 6 case is made public. Sen. Elizabeth Warren, Sen. Mark Kelly, Neal Katyal, and Andrew Weissmann join Lawrence O’Donnell.
Loading summary
Transcript141 lines
- [00:01]
Baratunde Thurston
This AI moment hits different. It's the first technology designed not just to serve us, but to be us. I'm Baratunde Thurston and on my new video podcast, Life With Machines, I'm going to talk to all kinds of folks, the people hitting the gas pedal on.
- [00:15]
Mel Robbins
This transition and those trying to pump the brakes.
- [00:17]
Baratunde Thurston
Watch and listen to Life with Machines powered by Lenovo in partnership with intel. Intel Core Ultra 7 processor powering Intel VPRO.
- [00:27]
Lawrence O'Donnell
Lenovo, Lenovo.
- [00:31]
Senator Elizabeth Warren
Hey, it's Mel Robbins, host of the Mel Robbins Podcast. Let's just cut to the chase.
- [00:36]
Baratunde Thurston
There is a change you want to make right now, but you're waiting to feel motivated. You don't need motivation. You've got me. You can change your life anytime you want.
- [00:46]
Senator Elizabeth Warren
And when you're ready, the Mel Robbins.
- [00:47]
Baratunde Thurston
Podcast is here to help you with.
- [00:49]
Senator Elizabeth Warren
Inspiration and simple science backed tools to.
- [00:52]
Baratunde Thurston
Help you create a better life.
- [00:53]
Lawrence O'Donnell
Listen to me and you'll feel motivated.
- [00:55]
Baratunde Thurston
All right, listen to the Mel Robbins.
- [00:57]
Senator Elizabeth Warren
Podcast now on Download it today.
- [01:02]
Baratunde Thurston
Now it's time for the Last word with Lawrence O'Donnell. Good evening, Lawrence.
- [01:05]
Lawrence O'Donnell
Good evening, Alex. We have Andrew Weisman and Neil Katyal joining us to talk about the Jack Smith Report. But before that, we're going to be joined by a couple of the tough questioners in today's hearing. Senator Elizabeth Warren, Senator Mark Kelly. And thank you, Alex, for your coverage of the hearing because your description of the way Republican Senator Joni Ernst finally got to yes, tonight is absolutely critical to understanding where this nomination stands. Her vote was not known until tonight. And the way you tracked it through that incredible pressure campaign on her, big money coming at her over the course of the last several weeks to force her, in effect, to voting for this nomination.
- [01:46]
Senator Elizabeth Warren
Just a stunning chain of events leading us to where we are tonight. I'm eager to hear other perspectives.
- [01:51]
Baratunde Thurston
Lawrence, I will be watching you tonight.
- [01:53]
Lawrence O'Donnell
Thanks, Alex. Thank you.
- [01:54]
Senator Elizabeth Warren
Have a great show.
- [01:55]
Lawrence O'Donnell
Thank you. Well, it wasn't always this way. Back when I was the staff director of the Senate Finance Committee, I helped that committee run several confirmation hearings, dozens of them for Treasury Department nominations, Health and Human Services Department nominations and others. And at every one of those hearings, both sides always asked serious questions. Always. In fact, each senator on both sides in those days asked serious questions. Some were better questions than others, but they were all serious. That was the minimum standard serious in the 21st century. TRUMP Republican Party in the United States Senate. Serious questions are disappearing.
- [02:44]
Senator Mark Kelly
How many push ups can you do? I did five sets of 47 this morning.
- [02:50]
Lawrence O'Donnell
The top Democrat on the Armed Services Committee today, Jack Reed of Rhode island, the former chairman of that committee, began the hearing on the Democratic side of the panel by telling Pete Hegseth he is the first nominee for Secretary of defense who he cannot vote for, including both of Donald Trump's previous nominees for Secretary of defense, who Jack Reid supported.
- [03:14]
Senator Mark Kelly
Mr. Hegstad, you are the ninth nominee.
- [03:16]
Lawrence O'Donnell
For Secretary of defense that I've had.
- [03:17]
Senator Mark Kelly
The honor to consider as a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee.
- [03:21]
Baratunde Thurston
I have voted in favor of all.
- [03:23]
Senator Mark Kelly
Your predecessors, including those in the first Trump administration. Unfortunately, you lack the character and composure and competence to hold the position of Secretary of Defense.
- [03:33]
Baratunde Thurston
Thank you.
- [03:35]
Lawrence O'Donnell
And then it got worse for Pete Hegseth.
- [03:39]
Senator Mark Kelly
I want to return to the incident that you referenced a minute ago that occurred in Monterey, California, in October 2017. At that time, you were still married to your second wife, correct? I believe so. And you had just fathered a child by a woman who would later become your third wife, correct? Senator, I was falsely charged, fully investigated, and completely cleared. So you think you are completely cleared because you committed no crime? That's your definition of cleared? You had just fathered a child two months before by a woman that was not your wife. I am shocked that you would stand here and say you're completely cleared. Can you so casually cheat on a second wife and cheat on the mother of a child that had been born two months before, and you tell us you are completely cleared. How is that a complete clear? Senator, her child's name is Gwendolyn Hope Hegseth, and she's a child of God, and she's seven years old. And she was. And you cheated on the mother of that child less than two months after that daughter was born, didn't you? Those were false charges. Well, no. Fully investigated, and I was completely cleared. And I am so grateful for the marriage. I have to this. You've admitted that you had sex at that hotel in October 2017. You said it was consensual. Isn't that correct? Anything. You've admitted that it was consensual and you were still married and you just had a child by another woman. Again, how do you explain your judgment? Completely false charges against me. You. You investigated and I'm completely clear. You have admitt that you had sex while you were married to wife two after you just had fathered a child by wife three. You've admitted that. Now, if it had been a sexual assault, that would be disqualifying to be Secretary of Defense, wouldn't it? It was a false claim. Then. And a false claim. Now, if it had been a sexual assault, that would be disqualifying to be Secretary of Defense, wouldn't it? That was a false claim. I'm talking about a hypothetical. So you can't tell me whether someone who has committed a sexual assault is disqualified from being Secretary of Defense. Senator, I know in my instance, and I'm talking about my instance only, it was a false claim. But you acknowledge. But you acknowledge that you cheated on your wife and that you cheated on the woman by whom you had just fathered a child. You have admitted that. I will allow your words to speak for themselves. You're not retracting that today. That's good. I assume that in each of your weddings, you've pledged to be faithful to your wife. You've taken an oath to do that, haven't you, Senator? As I've acknowledged to everyone in this committee, not a perfect person. Not claiming to be, but. No. I just asked a simple question. You've taken an oath. Like you would take an oath to be Secretary of Defense in all of your weddings, to be faithful to your wife. Is that correct? I have failed in things in my life. And thankfully, I'm redeemed by my Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. The incident in Monterey led to a criminal charge, a criminal investigation, a private settlement, and a cash payment to the woman who filed the complaint. And there was also a non disclosure agreement, correct? It was a confidential settlement agreement off of a nuisance lawsuit, right? During an interview, you claimed that you settled the matter because you were worried that if it became public, it might hurt your career. Do you maintain that you were blackmailed, Senator? I maintain that false claims were made against me and ultimately your attorney. I have the opportunity to attest my innocence in those false claims. But you didn't reveal any of this to President Trump or the transition team as they were considering you to be nominated for Secretary of Defense. You didn't. You didn't reveal the. The action, you didn't reveal the criminal complaint, you didn't reveal the criminal investigation, you didn't reveal the settlement, you didn't reveal the cash payment. Why didn't you inform the Commander in Chief and the transition team of this very relevant event? Senator, I've appreciated every part of the process with the transition team. They have been open and honest with me. We've had great conversations between the two of us, and I appreciate the opportunity that President Elect. But you chose not to reveal this, right, because you knew it would hurt your chances. So you chose not to reveal this really important thing to the Commander in chief of the transition team because you were worried about your chances rather than trying to be candid with the future President of the United States. Are there any other important facts that you chose not to reveal to the President elect and his team as they were considering you to be Secretary of Defense? Senator, I sit here before you in open book as everyone who's watched this process with multiple non disclosure and confidentiality agreements tying the hands of many people who would like to comment to us. One of your colleagues said that you got drunk at an event at a bar and chanted kill all Muslims. Another colleague not anonymous we have this said that you took coworkers to a strip club, you were drunk, you tried to dance with strippers, you had to be held off the stage and one of your employees in that event filed a sexual harassment charge as a result of it. Now, I know you denied these things, but isn't that the kind of behavior that, if true, would be disqualifying for somebody to be Secretary of Defense? Senator Anonymous false charges. They're not anonymous. And I'll just conclude and say this to the chairman. You claim that this was all anonymous. We have seen records with names attached to all of these, including the name of your own mother. So don't make this into some anonymous press thing.
- [09:17]
Lawrence O'Donnell
The New York Times headline on the hearing said hegseth won't say whether sexual assault, drinking or adultery is disqualifying. Decorated combat veteran Tammy Duckworth, who lost both of her legs in combat as a helicopter pilot, said this.
- [09:33]
Baratunde Thurston
How can we ask these warriors to train and perform the absolute highest standards when you are asking us to lower the standards to make you the Secretary of Defense simply because you are buddies with our President elect?
- [09:45]
Lawrence O'Donnell
Lower the standards. That is what Donald Trump has done every day of his political life. That is what Republican senators did today for the job of Secretary of Defense. The United States of America Lower the standards. The vote in the Senate on the Hegseth nomination is going to be a vote to lower the standards, yes or no. And Republicans who are constantly claiming to believe in nothing but meritocracy will vote to lower the standards. And Democrats will vote to preserve the standards.
- [10:21]
Baratunde Thurston
Let me make it clear. You can't seem to grasp that there is no US Military as we know it without the incredible women that we serve, women who've earned their place in their units. You have not earned your place as Secretary of Defense.
- [10:37]
Lawrence O'Donnell
Senator Elizabeth Warren easily exposed the naked hypocrisy of Pete Hegseth's Plans for the American military and what appear to possibly be his own plan to get as rich as possible from defense contractors four years from now, if he gets the big job.
- [10:59]
Baratunde Thurston
Now, Mr. Hegstaff, you have written that after they retire, generals should be banned from working for the defense industry for 10 years. You and I agree on the corrosive effects of the revolving door between the Pentagon and defense contractors. It's something I would have liked to talk with you about if you'd come and been willing to visit with me. But the question I have for you on this is, will you put your money where your mouth is and agree that when you leave this job, you will not work for the defense industry for 10 years?
- [11:31]
Senator Mark Kelly
Senator, it's not even a question I've thought about because it's not right now. It's not one. My motivation for this job.
- [11:39]
Baratunde Thurston
I understand that you just need a yes or no. Need to come next time is short. I just need a yes or no.
- [11:45]
Senator Mark Kelly
I would consult with the President about what the policy should be at the Defense Department.
- [11:48]
Baratunde Thurston
You're quite sure that every general who serves should not go directly into the defense industry for 10 years. You're not willing to make that same pledge?
- [12:00]
Senator Mark Kelly
I'm not a general, Senator.
- [12:04]
Baratunde Thurston
You'll be the one. Let us just be clear. In charge of the generals. So you're saying sauce for the goose, but certainly not sauce for the gander.
- [12:15]
Senator Mark Kelly
I would want to see what the policy of the President is.
- [12:16]
Baratunde Thurston
Oh, I'll bet you would.
- [12:18]
Senator Mark Kelly
Thank you, Senator Warren.
- [12:20]
Lawrence O'Donnell
Leading off our discussion tonight is Democratic Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts. She's a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee and the Senate Finance Committee and others. Senator, I want to begin exactly where you left off. And by the way, let me start with a question you maybe haven't thought of. Will you go to work for a defense contractor when you leave the Senate? And if you haven't thought about it, take your time and think about it.
- [12:40]
Baratunde Thurston
I haven't thought about it. And the answer is no.
- [12:43]
Lawrence O'Donnell
Seems pretty easy.
- [12:44]
Baratunde Thurston
Yeah, it seems pretty easy. And that's the whole point. He has thought about this. He has thought about the corrosive effect of the revolving door. And I agree, it is a corrosive effect. We really need to slow that down. And that's why I was so glad that our current Secretary of Defense, Lloyd Austin, four years ago, when he sat in that very same chair, made the commitment that he would not go into the defense industry. You know, that is the point Lloyd Austin wanted to make clear. He is here to Serve the American people. Pete Hegseth makes clear he is here to serve. Pete Hegseth.
- [13:24]
Lawrence O'Donnell
This is entirely about lowering standards, more so than any Senate confirmation hearing I've ever seen. This is a direct request. Lower the standards below anything you've ever dreamed of. Right.
- [13:35]
Baratunde Thurston
You know what's really remarkable about this? We sit on Senate Armed Services and as you know, we have to vote on everybody who hits levels of general in the. In the military. And the kinds of things that Pete Hegseth had that have been documented. These are not just kind of rumors floating out there about taking people to strip clubs and getting so drunk he went at work event, climbing up on stage to dance with the strippers, about having to be carried up to his room because he was so drunk at a work event. Sexual harassment claims against him, frankly, that would have stopped the career of anyone in the military from making it to those higher echelons. And yet the United States Senate is being asked, and evidently Republicans are responding to say, that's the person who will be in charge of America's military.
- [14:34]
Lawrence O'Donnell
Yeah, I just want to underline this point for the audience might not know that the high level officials in the military are. Their promotions at the general level are confirmed by United States Senate, by your committee. You have committee votes. They go to the Senate floor. They sometimes take a long time, actually, but there's a lot of them. And none of them would survive any of these.
- [14:54]
Baratunde Thurston
None would survive. And I really want to say here we vote them en masse, but we really do the investigations or the staff does the investigation. You know, I am still. Right now, the. Well, no, I guess not. We've changed Congresses. I was the chair of the subcommittee on personnel, and when there was even a little ink blot on someone's record, any kind of allegation not reaching anything close to the Pete Hegseth allegations, that was enough that we had to have a meeting. We had to go over the records, we had to talk through what had happened. And nobody went forward unless we had sign off from the chairman of the committee, from the ranking member of the committee, from the chair a subcommittee, the ranking member of the committee, the chair of the committee, all four on the Senate side. Before we could send anyone forward, we looked at it in detail because we understand the importance of this particular job interview. When people are responsible for our national defense, we ask something extraordinary of them. We ask them to put their lives on the line. We also ask them to live their lives in ways that inspire confidence both in those they lead and those in the public generally. You know, all three of my brothers served in the military. My oldest brother was career military. And the importance of internalizing those standards of honesty and integrity and that really does exclude things like taking your work group to a strip club and getting so drunk you try to dance with the strippers.
- [16:41]
Lawrence O'Donnell
There wouldn't have been one Republican vote in the Senate on the committee or the floor for this nomination before Donald Trump. This is what Donald Trump has done to standards.
- [16:54]
Baratunde Thurston
Yeah, I think, think that's exactly a fair description of what's happening here. You know, partly. And part of the problem today is there wasn't just one thing that we could talk about.
- [17:07]
Lawrence O'Donnell
Yeah.
- [17:08]
Baratunde Thurston
That would have been disqualifying. I'm not just talking about scratching through for maybe is there a problem here or a question there? It was, it's just over and over and over. So we have the problem that he has said that women should not serve in combat. In fact, he says they shouldn't serve in the military. Moms, he says in his book, just shouldn't be in the military at all. So we've got that problem when we count on a quarter of a million active duty military women right now. We have the problem of the sexual assaults and no one knows how many. We simply know it is a multiple non disclosure agreements on allegations that have been hushed up and pushed under the rug. We have the problem of drunk at work events. That's, and that's a, that's really serious. Particularly in the case of a Secretary of Defense who can be called anytime day or night and is going to have to make split second decisions. We need somebody who's going to be sober and someone who has had two previous management experiences. Neither one had more than 50 employees, by the way. Department of Defense is three and a half million. But in both of those earlier encounters where he's run an organization, he ran both of them into the ground financially and was asked to leave. So any one of those would have been enough to say no. And then, you know, if you watch the rest of it, when you listen to someone like Alissa Slotkin asked him very reasonable questions about the oath to the Constitution. And if Donald Trump asked you, any president asked the Secretary of Defense to do something that is unlawful, like use military force against a civilian population, would you say no? The right answer here is really clear. You would say no. He couldn't say no. When he was asked about the Geneva Convention by Senator Angus King, he couldn't say that he actually supports America's full participation and support for the Geneva Convention. I mean, so substantively he would be disqualified, but item by item by item in how he has lived his life. But right now, Donald Trump and the Republicans are pushing him through as fast as they can. They don't want details. They don't want to hear about this. They just want everybody on the Republican side to vote yes and move on.
- [19:56]
Lawrence O'Donnell
Senator, I can't thank you enough for joining us. After this first confirmation hearing in the Senate, there will be more and you're on other committees. There'll be more there. Thank you very much for joining us.
- [20:05]
Baratunde Thurston
Thank you for having me.
- [20:06]
Lawrence O'Donnell
And up next, Senator Mark Kelly offered Pete Hegseth multiple chances to deny descriptions of his drunken conduct. And he did not actually deny those descriptions. We'll show you that next when Senator Mark Kelly joins us.
- [20:28]
Mel Robbins
Hey, this is Jeff Lewis from Radio Andy live and uncensored.
- [20:31]
Baratunde Thurston
Catch me talking with my friends about.
- [20:32]
Lawrence O'Donnell
My latest obsessions, relationship issues and bodily ailments.
- [20:36]
Baratunde Thurston
With that kind of drama that seems.
- [20:37]
Mel Robbins
To follow me, you never know what's going to happen.
- [20:40]
Senator Elizabeth Warren
You can listen to Jeff Lewis live.
- [20:42]
Baratunde Thurston
At home or anywhere you are.
- [20:44]
Senator Elizabeth Warren
Download the SiriusXM app for over 425 channels of ad free music, sports, entertainment and more.
- [20:51]
Lawrence O'Donnell
Subscribe now and get 3 months free offer details apply.
- [20:59]
Andrew Weissman
Some things you wouldn't mind being stuck with like a huge inheritance, but a.
- [21:02]
Baratunde Thurston
Phone that has to be plugged in.
- [21:03]
Andrew Weissman
Just right so it charges is not one of those things.
- [21:06]
Baratunde Thurston
Switch to Verizon and we'll pay off your old phone up to $800 via.
- [21:09]
Senator Mark Kelly
Prepaid MasterCard for a new one.
- [21:11]
Baratunde Thurston
On us, just trade in any phone.
- [21:13]
Andrew Weissman
From our top brands with Select Unlimited plans.
- [21:15]
Baratunde Thurston
$829.99 purchase with new smartphone line on select unlimited plans. Minimum $90 per month with autopay plus.
- [21:19]
Andrew Weissman
Taxes and fees for 36 months required.
- [21:20]
Baratunde Thurston
Plus $830 trade in promo credit applied.
- [21:22]
Andrew Weissman
Over 36 months trade in terms apply.
- [21:23]
Baratunde Thurston
Payoff phone requires smartphone purchase important with.
- [21:25]
Senator Elizabeth Warren
New smartphone line unselect client must provide.
- [21:27]
Baratunde Thurston
Most recent bill showing payoff amount of.
- [21:28]
Senator Mark Kelly
Eligible phone additional terms of life.
- [21:30]
Baratunde Thurston
It's time to have your High Five moment with High Five Casino, the top social casino where the action and real prizes never stop. Fun spins and big wins are right at your fingertips. With over a thousand games including High Five Casino exclusives. High Five Casino is always free to play with free coins given out every four hours. Sign up today and get free welcome coins you can spin for a chance at cash prizes, visit high5casino.com High5casino no purchase necessary. Void where prohibited by law must be 21 years or older. Terms and conditions apply.
- [22:04]
Lawrence O'Donnell
Pete Hegseth was not testifying under oath, but it is still against the law to lie to Congress. And so he was careful not to deny most of the damning accusations against him.
- [22:20]
Senator Elizabeth Warren
I just want you to tell me if these are true or false. Very simple. On Memorial Day 2014, at a CVA event in Virginia, you needed to be carried out of the event for being intoxicated.
- [22:36]
Senator Mark Kelly
Senator. Anonymous smears.
- [22:38]
Senator Elizabeth Warren
Just true or false? Very simple. Summer of 2014, in Cleveland, drunk in public with the CVA team.
- [22:48]
Senator Mark Kelly
Anonymous smears.
- [22:50]
Senator Elizabeth Warren
I'm just asking for true or false questions. True or false answers. An event in North Carolina, drunk in front of three young female staff members after you had instituted a no alcohol policy and then reversed it. True or false?
- [23:04]
Senator Mark Kelly
Anonymous smears.
- [23:06]
Lawrence O'Donnell
He could have said false, but his lawyer no doubt told him that lying to the committee is against the law.
- [23:15]
Senator Elizabeth Warren
December of 2014, at the CVA Christmas party at the Grand Hyatt at Washington, D.C. you were noticeably intoxicated and had to be carried up to your room. Is that true or false?
- [23:28]
Senator Mark Kelly
Anonymous smears.
- [23:29]
Senator Elizabeth Warren
Another time, a CVA staffer stated that you passed out in the back of a party bus. Is that true or false?
- [23:37]
Senator Mark Kelly
Anonymous smears.
- [23:40]
Lawrence O'Donnell
Joining our discussion now is Democratic Senator Mark Kelly of Arizona, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee. And, Senator, I know this is not what you came to the Senate to do. You are not a trained prosecutor, cross examiner. But no prosecutor could have done it better. The true or false construction couldn't have been more simple. And he couldn't handle it.
- [24:00]
Senator Elizabeth Warren
Yeah, he had a challenging time with that line of questioning. That's not what I went in there planning to ask him. I wanted to ask him questions more about his management experience at cva, at the Vets for Freedom organization. But after we got through a couple senators, it was clear that he was being very evasive about this. And these are serious accusations, and it's multiple accusations. And this job, Lawrence, is just so critical for our national security. This isn't a job that you do eight hours a day, five days a week. This is 24, 7, 365 days out of the year. So I have serious concerns, I did during the committee hearing, and I still do, about his readiness. I mean, he talked in his books about drinking heavily. He talks about overcoming personal problems. He says these are smears. But he won't address what the personal problems are. It can't be both. I mean, it has to be one or the Other. And I thought when I started asking him these questions, I thought he was going to say, hey, these things are false because he's denied these. He's publicly denied it. But as you say, he just couldn't get there. And he talks about these smears. So I still have concerns and I hope to meet with him to go over these further.
- [25:14]
Lawrence O'Donnell
And he refused to meet. This is again, a stunning thing that I've never heard of in the confirmation process. He refused to meet with Democratic members of the committee.
- [25:24]
Senator Elizabeth Warren
Yeah, we provided a lot of opportunities, a lot of days, a lot of different hours in my schedule, very busy schedule, but we made a lot of time available. He would not meet with us before the hearing. I did have a scheduled meeting with him tomorrow. They've now come back to us and say they have to reschedule it. And I think it's for actually a legitimate cause. He says there's some kind of transition team tabletop thing he's got to go to. So I take him at his word. Hopefully I'll meet with him this week before we get into next week when we have to start voting on this nominee.
- [25:56]
Lawrence O'Donnell
But I just want to stress this point for the audience. Nominees meet with every member of the committee. That's how they begin.
- [26:02]
Senator Elizabeth Warren
They do. Traditionally. My understanding, I've only been there for four years and I didn't do this through Secretary Austin.
- [26:07]
Lawrence O'Donnell
But yes, procedural thing, hugely important, not noticed probably by most people in the audience. One round of questioning per senator. I have never seen that limitation imposed in a situation like this. And Jack Reed asked for a second round. You picked up that objection. I know all the Democrats objected, so you were limited to only seven minutes of questioning. And what was normal in all these hearings in the past is if you had more, and sometimes you don't have more, but if you have more, you'll get a second round if you stick around and wait for it.
- [26:39]
Senator Elizabeth Warren
Yeah. And I had a bunch of very relevant questions about policy, about weapons systems that DOD is currently trying to acquire. Sentinel program being one slick em. The nuclear version of that and some controversy around it to see where he stands on these really important things. But with the personal issues that he has and the accusations out there, I mean, we had to address those things first. And you very quickly run out of seven minutes. I mean, it's, it's, it's, it goes by really fast.
- [27:10]
Lawrence O'Donnell
Yeah. Going forward, what are you looking for? If this is the Secretary of defense, if he makes it. And with Joni Ernst vote announced tonight, he's a Lot closer to, to making it. How do you oversee this department?
- [27:26]
Senator Elizabeth Warren
Well, I mean, I think we've got to, you know, hold, you know, him accountable to doing the best job he possibly can. And I will do whatever I can to help. I mean, assuming that he gets confirmed, that we haven't had the votes yet and we haven't counted, but I think with her announcement, I think it's rather likely that he gets confirmed. We need him to be successful. I don't want to see anybody in Congress trying to trip the guy up. I mean, our national security is. There's nothing more important. So I'll do my best to be as supportive, but also hold them accountable for when they're making what I view as poor decisions that are not in the best interest of the American people and my constituents.
- [28:10]
Lawrence O'Donnell
In your own experience in the military, what does a nomination like this say to the people out there serving in our military?
- [28:17]
Senator Elizabeth Warren
Yeah, I spent 25 years on active duty in the United States Navy. I flew in combat in the first Gulf War off of an aircraft carrier. I was a test pilot. I was at NASA for 15 years as a Navy astronaut. You know, I think any president is going to pick somebody he's going to be comfortable with. You know, my hope is that all presidents look at how competent the person is. Are they ready to do this job on day one? Do they have issues in their, you know, background that would make you question, especially the people in the military, you know, women, minorities in the military. Are they going to look at this SecDef and wonder, is he really representing them? You know, what is, what does he think of them? You know, that concerns me. Obviously, the president elect wanted this individual. I don't think they did a very thorough job, you know, looking, you know, at his background. And because of that, we found, you know, where we, where we had today and we had to ask him a lot of very uncomfortable questions. Not ideal, I would have expected, with a different nominee, somebody else sitting at the, you know, in that seat, in that room. Questions I would have been asking would have been much different and would not.
- [29:36]
Lawrence O'Donnell
Have required a lowering of the standards for a vote in the Senate and.
- [29:39]
Senator Elizabeth Warren
Wouldn'T require me going through a list of things and just saying, is this true or false? And I'm still troubled by the fact that he could not answer that question. It's very, it's a pretty simple thing to do.
- [29:51]
Lawrence O'Donnell
Senator Mark Kelly, thank you very much for joining our discussion.
- [29:54]
Senator Elizabeth Warren
Thank you.
- [29:55]
Lawrence O'Donnell
Coming up, special prosecutor Jack Smith's report released overnight says Donald Trump is guilty. Andrew Weissman and Neil Katyal join our discussion next.
- [30:06]
Senator Mark Kelly
Hey everybody, it's Rob Lowe here.
- [30:09]
Lawrence O'Donnell
If you haven't heard, I have a podcast that's called Literally with Rob Lowe.
- [30:15]
Senator Mark Kelly
And basically it's conversations I've had that really make you feel like you're pulling.
- [30:21]
Lawrence O'Donnell
Up a chair at an intimate dinner between myself and people that I admire.
- [30:26]
Senator Mark Kelly
Like Aaron Sorkin or Tiffany Haddish, Demi.
- [30:30]
Lawrence O'Donnell
Moore, Chris Pratt, Michael J. Fox.
- [30:34]
Senator Mark Kelly
There are new episodes out every Thursday, so subscribe please and listen wherever you get your podcasts.
- [30:42]
Baratunde Thurston
It's time to have your High Five moment with High Five Casino, the top social casino where the action and real prizes never stop, fun spins and big wins are right at your fingertips. With over a thousand games, including High Five Casino exclusives, High Five Casino is always free to play with free coins given out every four hours. Sign up today and get free welcome coins you can spin. For a chance at cash prizes, visit high5casino.com High5casino no purchase necessary. Void where prohibited by law. Must be 21 years or older. Terms and conditions apply. This cold and flu season Instacart is here to help deliver all of your sick day essentials. Whether you're in prevention mode and need vitamins, hand sanitizer and that lemon tea your nana swears by, or you're in healing mode and need medicine, soup and a lot more tissues. Simply download the Instacart app to get sick day supplies that reinvigorate or relieve delivered in as fast as 30 minutes plus enjoy. $0 delivery fees on your first three orders. Excludes restaurant orders. Service fees and terms apply.
- [31:45]
Lawrence O'Donnell
Jack Smith says he found proof beyond a reasonable doubt that Donald Trump is guilty. Quote indeed. But for Mr. Trump's election and imminent return to the presidency, the office assessed that the admissible evidence was sufficient to obtain and sustain a conviction at trial. That is from Jack Smith's report, made public just after midnight last night of his investigation of Donald Trump's attempt to overturn the 2020 presidential election. Leading up to and on January 6th, Jack Smith says there is a through line to his 137 page report. Quote, the through line of all of Mr. Trump's criminal efforts was deceit, knowingly false claims of election fraud and the evidence shows that Mr. Trump used these lies as a weapon to defeat a federal government function foundational to the United States democratic process. The report describes Donald Trump as the head of the criminal conspiracies and their intended beneficiary. In a four page letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland accompanying His report, Jack Smith says that the investigative and prosecutorial teams he assembled, quote, are people of great decency and the highest personal integrity. The intense public scrutiny of our office, threats to their safety, and relentless, unfounded attacks on their character and integrity did not deter them from fulfilling their oaths and professional obligations. These are intensely good people who did hard things well. I will not forget the sacrifices they made and the personal resilience they and their families have shown over the last two years. Our country owes them a debt of gratitude for their unwavering service and dedication to the rule of law. My office had one North Star to follow the facts and law wherever they led. Nothing more and nothing less. While I relied greatly on the counsel, judgment and advice of our team, I wanted to be clear that the ultimate decision to bring charges against Mr. Trump was mine. It is a decision I stand behind fully. To have done otherwise on the facts developed during our work would have been to shirk my duties as a prosecutor and a public servant. After nearly 30 years of public service, that is a choice I could not abide. Jack Smith added a personal note about Donald Trump's attacks on him. To all who know me well, the claim from Mr. Trump that my decisions as a prosecutor were influenced or directed by the Biden administration or other political actors is, in a word, laughable. Joining us now is Neil Katyal, former acting US Solicitor General and Professor at Georgetown Law. Also with us, Andrew Weissman, former FBI General Counsel and former Chief of the Criminal Division in the Eastern District of New York. He's an NYU law professor. They are both MSNBC legal analysts. Andrew, you have participated in writing such reports. What is your assessment of this one.
- [34:57]
Andrew Weissman
In terms of the substance? It is a sober, dispassionate recitation of the facts and the law. It is now public. It is something that everyone can read, and I commend everyone to do that. I did want to focus, as you have, Lawrence, on the four page letter. That's an easy thing for people to read that starts the report. And it's beautifully written, it is personal in tone, and it talks about not just what you've outlined, but also sort of what the guiding principles were for Jack Smith and his team. And I think it's wonderful that he wrote that letter. The only thing, and I'm old enough to remember this, is I am a big fan of Archibald Cox and that approach to thinking about different ways of communicating to the public and the written word is terrific. But I commend everyone also, if they want, a great lesson in how a Responsible prosecutor can also use the media to, within the appropriate guidelines of not disparaging a defendant, but explaining what they're doing by going to a press conference, as Archibald Cox did, and laying it out. And it allows people not just to take in the information through the media, but it also allows to assess credibility and get a sense of the person. Jack Smith has been so characterized and caricatured and vilified by Donald Trump and his allies that I just think that's a missed opportunity. And he's so worthy of people listening to him and seeing him for what he is, which is a public servant at heart.
- [36:55]
Lawrence O'Donnell
Neal Katyal, what is your reading of this report?
- [36:59]
Mel Robbins
So my first Tor Lawrence at the justice department back in 1999, I led a group of people to write the special counsel regulations that Jack Smith is appointed under. I can tell you that from reading the report today, it really does seem that Jack Smith was in the best traditions of the Justice Department. Exactly what we had in mind back in 1999 when we wrote this. In particular, a fearless, unflinching devotion to law enforcement, a non political view. That's what the report goes on and on at length to really outline. And what Smith is saying in this report is, look, I followed the rules. It's other people who rewrote them, and in particular the United States Supreme Court. He says no court had ever found that presidents were immune from criminal responsibility. And we proceeded from the same premise. And even Lawrence dropped some language from Justice Sotomayor's dissent, analogizing the Trump immunity decision to Korematsu, the Japanese internment case, and saying it gives a license for presidents to go and kill political opponents. And so you can see his frustration with the Supreme Court in the report because they did change the rules in the middle of this investigation. So all that I think is really important. I think one other thing that's really important. And you flashed this at the beginning of the segment, there's some language saying but for Trump's return to the presidency, he would have been convicted. That's really important. And it was preceded by language that Jack Smith used that said, look, the reason there's no prosecution is because of a categorical rule that a sitting president cannot be prosecuted. And it doesn't turn on the gravity of the crimes charged or anything like that. And here's why that's so important. It's the opposite is Andrew knows better than anyone of what Bill Barr did in the Mueller report, because what Bill Barr did is he took the Mueller report, supposedly summarized it by saying Basically, Trump did nothing wrong, but actually hiding for many weeks what the report actually said, which was, you can't indict a sitting president because of this legal rule that distorted all of the public discourse. I'm glad to see Jack Smith trying to return to this and to say, look, the evidence is overwhelming. We could have sustained a conviction. It was just this technicality that prevented us from doing so.
- [39:27]
Lawrence O'Donnell
We're going to squeeze in a quick break here. When we come back, I want to go to the point that Jack Smith's report shows that some Republicans in Pennsylvania refused to participate in Donald Trump's lie about the 2020 presidential election, while Pam Bondi was publicly supporting that lie about Pennsylvania, which is obviously why Donald Trump chose her as his next Attorney General. We'll come back with that. We need to fix this.
- [39:58]
Baratunde Thurston
We need to remedy this now, because we've won Pennsylvania and we want every.
- [40:03]
Lawrence O'Donnell
Vote to be counted in a fair way, that is former Attorney General of Florida, Pam Bondi. Jack Smith's report cites another Republican who saw the situation as a crime in progress in Pennsylvania, one Trump, the report says one Trump elector nominee Pennsylvania recognized the plan as illegal and an attempt to overthrow the government, and he declined to participate. But Pam Bundy did participate in that plan to overthrow the government for Donald Trump, and that is why her confirmation hearing for Attorney General of the United States is scheduled for tomorrow morning. Neil Katyal and Andrew Weissman are back with us. And Andrew, you have this person in Pennsylvania who wasn't an Attorney General of anything, figure out that what he was looking at was a crime and Pam Bondi was right out there cheering for that criminal course of action.
- [41:02]
Andrew Weissman
Sure. Well, for Pam Bondi, one of the questions for her is tell me what facts, what specific facts you're aware of that make you think that there was outcome determinative fraud. What you're referring to is the so called fake elector scheme. And what happened is obviously there's some fake electors who are alleged and actually some have pleaded guilty to having participated in this fraudulent scheme. But there were others who thought what they were doing and being asked to do was just be an alternative slate of electors if and only if the court system in that state said that, that Joe Biden had not won and Donald Trump had won. And so they were just an alternative slate. And in Pennsylvania, electors insisted on that language. And the Trump campaign basically realized, this is going to really hurt us because we need them to essentially be duped into thinking, no, you're just going to be an alternative slate electors. But they're going to use it as a fake slate. So that's why you have electors, some who are in on it, some who they were trying to have be dupes. But no matter what, you shouldn't have Pam Bondi, who is now the nominee to be or the proposed nominee for the Department of Justice to be, advocating something that, as to which there are no substantive facts to support.
- [42:30]
Lawrence O'Donnell
And, Neil, the report does say that Donald Trump knew Jack Smith proved beyond reasonable doubt, as part of the elements of the evidence here, that Donald Trump knew that he lost the election, that everything he was saying about it was not true.
- [42:46]
Mel Robbins
Yeah. I mean, and what did Donald Trump say in response today? He called it a political hit job. I think all that. The report shows that Jack Smith hit the nail on the head, Lawrence. And, you know, I think the report, in the end, is gonna be important. It's gonna be important for victims because Smith talks about, like, how the Capitol Police officer in shell shock and all the harm that happened to them. I think it's going to be important for history and the eyes of the American people in the world over the decades to come about what happened on January 6th. I think it's important for the tradition of law enforcement as well. It does show that we are better than some other countries where there wouldn't have been any investigation at all into what happened. But at the end of the day, you have to be left with nothing but a sense of dismay and there's lots of blame to go around about why Donald Trump wasn't brought to justice. It's not just the Supreme Court's fault. But at the end of the day, Trump got away with it. The report makes clear he got away with it. He did it, and he got away with it.
- [43:48]
Lawrence O'Donnell
And, Andrew, the point about history, this document is gonna be very clear and very plain for historians 100 years from now, 200 years from now, looking at this period, and they will be writing books about this for the next couple of hundred years. This is more valuable in its way than the indictment, which has a more technical flow to it. This really is a document that is going to live a very long time.
- [44:14]
Andrew Weissman
That is true. But that is also why the part of the report that is not yet public dealing with the classified documents. It's important that that be something that the public see. And it's also important that the underlying evidence remain intact so that people who are conspiracy theorists and obviously Donald Trump, who is busy saying it's all a witch hunt and it's all fake, it's important for history that that material be intact. One way to do that is to make sure for the department in these remaining days to make sure that other parts of the government have that information, whether it's Congress or the courts or the state system, so that for history there is a preserved record for everyone to be able to look at and debate what happened.
- [45:04]
Lawrence O'Donnell
Andrew Weissman and Neal Katyal, thank you both very much for joining us tonight.
- [45:08]
Senator Mark Kelly
Thank you.
- [45:09]
Andrew Weissman
Welcome.
- [45:10]
Lawrence O'Donnell
We'll be right back. Programming note on Thursday, I'll be interviewing President Biden in the Oval Office for what will be his final interview. You'll see that interview on this program Thursday night. That is tonight's last word.
- [45:29]
Baratunde Thurston
Pandora makes it easy for you to find your favorite music. Discover new artists and genres by selecting any song or album and we'll make.
- [45:35]
Lawrence O'Donnell
You a personalized station for free download on the Apple App Store or Google.
- [45:39]
Baratunde Thurston
Play and enjoy the soundtrack to your life.