Skip to main content

tv   The Rachel Maddow Show  MSNBC  April 23, 2015 1:00am-2:01am PDT

1:00 am
environments to understand these issues and come along. >> dr. michelle forcier and jean malpas, really appreciate it. that is "all in" for this evening. "the rachel maddow show" starts right now. good evening, rachel. >> good evening, chris. thanks to you at home for joining us this hour. this is going to be a great show. the interview tonight is senator elizabeth warren of massachusetts. president obama, of course, did that interview yesterday with chris matthews on "hardball," in which the president said he loves elizabeth warren. he thinks of elizabeth warren as a great ally. but on one issue before the country right now, and in particular, one issue before the democratic party right now, the president said he completely disagrees with her. senator elizabeth warren is here tonight to respond. and to explain her point of view on this issue. i'm very much looking forward to that. again, senator elizabeth warren here tonight for the interview. it is always good to have her on the show. she honestly doesn't do that many interviews, especially as proportionate of the number she is asked for.
1:01 am
so i do always feel really lucky wherever we can get her and we got her tonight. and it feels particularly lucky to get her tonight, while she was in the midst of that big political controversy, and this dialogue with the president that she's now having in public. but it's lucky to get her in the midst of that, and also while there is so much other interesting political news going on right now. today, former secretary of state hillary clinton released this video from her presidential campaign, asking people to sign up and volunteer for that campaign, but also declaring that she is going to run for president in 2016, using a howard dean-style 50-state strategy. they're trying to form organizing committees, according to this video released today, organizing committees in all 50 states and in all u.s. territories. that's what they're trying to get volunteers for right now in every state of the country. now, a 50-state strategy has enormous visceral appeal, right? it's like the idealist's platonic form of how you ought righteously campaign for a
1:02 am
national office like the presidency. the 50-state strategy idea does tend to run into some practical concerns down the road, like, whether or not it really makes sense to have a full-scale hillary clinton for president operation in a state like, you know, alabama, when there's an opportunity cost to that. when you might reasonably send those alabama volunteers to, you know, georgia, say, or somebody else where they might get more traction. i don't know. but that campaign announcement today from the hillary clinton folks is really strategically interesting in terms of how she's going to run and it could end up being competitively really important in terms of the race. also, news today from this person. do you know who this person is? this is a person called carly fiorina. she was the ceo of the computer company hp for six years before she left on not-great terms. miss fiorina then turned full-time to republican politics. she ran for senate against barbara boxer in california, in
1:03 am
the very, very, very republican year of 2010, but even though it was a very, very republican year, carly fiorina lost that senate race to barbara boxer in california by ten points. today, though, she said that on may 4th, she, carly fiorina, will announce that she is running for the republican nomination for president of the united states, which is exciting. there will be at least one woman running for the nomination on the republican side. however, what is immediately awkward about this news today, about carly fiorina, is that another republican presidential candidate has already picked may 4th as the day that was going to be his announcement day. retired surgeon ben carson said days ago that he was going to announce his run on may 4th, but now carly fiorina is going to announce her run on may 4th as well. and the next day, after that, on may 5th, mike huckabee is apparently going to announce. so if the point of announcing is to steal the spotlight for a minute, right?
1:04 am
to get everybody's attention. to get people to pay attention to you, you, you in a big, crowded field. that monday and tuesday at the beginning of may, may 4th and 5th, are kind of going to be a waste of energy for these three candidates. wasting energy when they can't really afford to, because they're not exactly household names. this is going to be like turning your porchlight on in the middle of a bright, sunny day. yes, you're illuminate something, but only from about an inch away. there are a ton of candidates running on the republican side. the new england press reported over the weekend that by their count, there's something like maybe 19, maybe 21 different republican candidates who are all campaigning on and off in new hampshire right now. there's a ton of them. and particularly if you're a candidate who people, you know, innately don't take seriously, right, and who may be doesn't have an actual job right now that keeps you in the limelight, like, if you are, for example, a former hp executive, from years ago, or a retired doctor, or a
1:05 am
former fox news host, like mike huckabee, or, you know, whatever you are, if you're george pataki right now, if you are anybody who doesn't have a regular high-profile job that keeps you in the limelight, your presidential announcement day, that might be your best, it might even be your only chance to get attention to the prospects of your presidential candidacy. you don't want to waste it. and those three guys are all going to apparently announce within 24 hours. now, if you do have a day job in politics, off slight advantage over guys like that. you do, if you have a day job, that's a high-profile job in politics, you have other options for making national attentions and making people pay attention to you. so if you're looking at that kind of third tier, not very well-known candidates or candidates that people aren't necessarily, immediately, taking seriously, people like carly fiorina or ben carson or even mike huckabee, one of the other best-known names in that tier, at that level, is louisiana governor bobby jindal.
1:06 am
but for him, at least as the governor of louisiana, bobby jindal has the option for running for president in base on the way he runs for louisiana. he can use his governorship as part of his presidential campaign. and louisiana, right now, in part, because of bobby jindal's presidential hopes, is about to run into a little bit of a political buzz saw. at least, that's what it seems like is about to happen. this is indiana's republican governor, mike pence. before a few weeks ago, mike pence was also one of the people talked about as a potential presidential candidate, about the level of a bobby jindal or a mike huckabee or a carly fiorina. mike huckabee a very well-known guy in republican politics before becoming governor of indiana, he had a long career in washington, among the heavyweights. mike pence has been on the edge of presidential possibility for numerous cycles. this year he's been stoking interest in himself as a potential presidential candidate. he was telling reporters he was
1:07 am
actively considering making a run in 2016, people were actively considering him as a dark horse contender for the nomination, until that all stopped when indiana had its big oops a few weeks ago. you'll remember how this went. it started with a signing ceremony attended by mostly nuns and friars. governor pence as trying to identify this as squarely a religious matter, signed a discrimination bill into law in indiana, which briefly but intensely put indiana at the center of a national firestorm of criticism, particularly from the business world. the backlash against mike pence's anti-gay discrimination bill in indiana was not only national news, it visibly shook him, in a way that i think instantly shook him out of consideration as a potential national leader. he was thrown for such a loop by what he did in indiana. he seemed so unprepared, so shocked and so, you be able to
1:08 am
handle the pressure once it came. and he eventually tried to take it all back. days after passing the law, he climbed down from praising the bill to saying, well, at least the bill shouldn't be changed, to then saying, oh, the bill should definitely be changed, to then changing it. it was a mess. a group called alliance defending freedom had been pushing that bill in indiana, and in lots of other red states around the country, after what mike pence in indiana went through, though, when they passed it, a lot of other states that had been poised to pass exactly the same thing were able to bail out at the last minute, and either change their mike pence-style bill or abandon them altogether. the alliance defending freedom group, incidentally, this is a special for you regular watchers of "the rachel maddow show," you may remember that the alliance defending freedom is the same group that also pushed to have pages about human reproduction ripped out of the honors biology textbooks in gilbert, arizona. remember that story? same group. that didn't work either. but while their efforts to pass these discrimination bills
1:09 am
around the country basically got waylaid by the mike pence disaster if indiana, and all of these other states that were considering it pulled back or changed their bills, because of what happened to mike pence in indiana, in bobby jindal's louisiana, they're still steaming ahead with is. it's a former alliance defending staffer, who's the louisiana state legislator, who has sponsored the bill in that state. the reason that the louisiana bill has not died there the way it has died everywhere, after mike pence's experience, is because bobby jindal, running for president, says he wants to sign it. he wants that bill for louisiana, even as huge business interests in the state, companies like ibm, and electronic arts companies that bobby jindal personally wood to come open new facilities in louisiana, even as those business have objected and said louisiana shouldn't do this, bobby jindal says he still wants to do it. screw those business leaders, even the ones that he personally lobbied to come to louisiana, he wants to do this discrimination bill.
1:10 am
and yes, bobby jindal appears to want to run for president. and it's hard the not to imagine this is part of his strategy. and even though the beltway never talks about it this way, social conservatism and super controversial social issues like that remain still right at the heart of republican policy around the country and right at the heart of republican politics at the national level. this really is what is important to them. and it's going to be the dynamic at hand, as they all start competing for the nomination, all the several dozens of them. and that is fascinating for those of us watching it from anywhere in the country right now, because social issues, even as the beltway says they are not important, they are manifesting in republican politics constantly and increasingly, and social issues right now, as this key issue in how the republicans are going to pick their nominee, social issues right now are fast-moving in terms of public opinion, and totally unpredictable in terms of what's going to crop up as a policy challenge. for example, just next week, the supreme court of the united
1:11 am
states will be hearing the big same-sex marriage case that could affect same-sex marriage laws and marriage laws more broadly if all 50 states. the fox news channel host bill o'reilly is gearing up nightly for those oral arguments by crusading against supreme court justices ruth bader ginsburg and elena kagan, saying that those justices should be pushed somehow to recuse themselves from the marriage case, because they, as individual judges, have officiated at same-sex weddings, so therefore they're too biassed to rule in the case. all of the republican presidential contenders this year, or at least all the ones that i can name off the top of my head, all of them are against marriage rights. they're all against gay couples being allowed to get married, even as most of the country is okay with it. i mean, the republican hopefuls for president, because of the distance between them and public opinion on this issue, they're having a hard time talking about gay rights and gay marriage already. if the supreme court in this case next week hands down a ruling, that has nationwide
1:12 am
impact, well, those conversations about gay rights and the competition between republican candidates ton gay rights issue is going to get a lot more complicated than it is right now and a lot weird than it is right now and that's going to happen very, very fast. and then the day after the marriage case is heard next week, the very next day, it will be the lethal injection case at the supreme court. and we've been focusing on that here, on this show, in the last couple of days, because there is something factually really strange going on about that case, and it feels to me like it's about to become a giant neon flashing national question mark. as you know, the case the supreme court will hear on lethal injections next week out of oklahoma, one state out of many that's had trouble with its lethal injection procedures over the last few months and years. this past friday, oklahoma's republican governor, mary fallin, signed a new law just ahead of those supreme court arguments that sets oklahoma up
1:13 am
with a backup plan. a backup means of injection -- means of execution, in case their use of lethal injection is used by the supreme court in next week's case. oklahoma is a deep red state. oklahoma is a very, very, very pro-death penalty state. but oklahoma has now invented and put into state law very quickly a new form of execution that's never been done before. not only here in the united states, but anywhere in the world. and they have done it at a time when the death penalty and the politics around it are really chaotic. it's no longer as simple as liberals not liking the death penalty and conservatives liking the death penalty. there's still a little bit of that, but it's getting way woollier. just this legislative session, the very republican montana state legislator advanced a bill to repeal the death penalty in montana. the bill ultimately failed down the line, but the fact that it got as far as it did was like a shock wave in montana politics. nobody news there was as much opposition to the death penalty, even among conservative republicans.
1:14 am
but that bill uncovered a whole current of opposition to the death penalty that nobody had tested before. same thing in nebraska. nebraska is a nominally nonpartisan legislature, but overwhelmingly dominated by republican and conservative legislators. nevertheless, conservative nebraska just passed a bill to repeal the death penalty in that state. and they passed it by a big margin. it's not a done deal, it has a couple more votes it has to go through. there's talk of a filibuster, there's talk from the nebraska governor that i knew he might veto the repeal. but if that repeal bill keeps passing the same way it did last week, in nebraska, they've got a veto-proof majority to repeal the death penalty. in deep red republican nebraska. so there's this weird dynamic going on that's making all of this really unpredictable and really fascinating. you have the process of lethal injection, logistically becoming totally chaotic. it may get struck down by the
1:15 am
supreme court in this case next week. even if it doesn't, there are almost no states in the country that actually have a way to get the drugs that are used for lethal injection anymore. that's happening in just the nuts and bolts level. it's just becoming impossible logistically to do it. then in right-wing politics, there's this broader move on the right, supported by people like the koch brothers and others to have republicans change tact on criminal justice issues, including sentencing reform and drug policy and all this other kind of broad criminal justice stuff. but that apparently extends to changing conservative views on the death penalty. it's conservative groups and republican advocacy groups that have been making progress in red states, to try to get them to get rid of their death penalty for conservative reasons. in addition to liberals being against it for all the reasons that liberals are. and in the middle of all of that, basically on the eve of this supreme court case, there's oklahoma. there's oklahoma. oklahoma, the inventor of lethal injection in the first place, now inventing america's newest
1:16 am
form of execution, one which they say has the advantage of not requiring the participation or even the input of doctors or scientists of any kind. >> people have made fun of us because, oh, you know, you have no medical background, how dare you go out and try to do this? well, that's with it's come to, because no doctors can be involved, it is left to people who don't know. so, i mean, we do the best that we can. >> that is an oklahoma legal studies professor named christine pappas, who was involved in the research team who recommended to the oklahoma legislature that the state invent this new form of capital punishment, that would use nitrogen gas to kill prisoners for the first time anywhere in the country, anywhere in the world. professor pappas, i should say, is personally against the death penalty. she said she had qualms about participating in this research, in terms of the state inventing a new method for killing prisoners, because she's against the death penalty, but hoped her research efforts could help find the most humane option possible. we ended up sending our producer, kate osborn, down to
1:17 am
oklahoma to talk with professor pappas and the other folks who came up with this new method of execution in part because we had a hard time figuring out where it came from. there's an intersection track on where the electric chair came from, and where the gas chamber, the first one, came from, and lethal injection came from, but where did this idea from nitrogen gas come from? it has never been done anywhere in the world. and the basis on which oklahoma decided to adopt this new method of killing people turns out had surprises at every turn once we started unraveling it. here's an example, this is the merck manual. a very, very common medical reference book. it's the best-selling medical textbook in the world and it has been forever. in the draft report to the oklahoma legislature, recommending that they start using nitrogen to kill people, the merck manuel is referenced as the merrick manual. its article on respiratory asidosiss.
1:18 am
and the first two pieces of evidence they gave to the legislature were this article from slate magazine from last may, which was written by a slate magazine writer, not a scientific or expert document of any kind. the second piece of evidence was this article, which is an opinion piece from the conservative magazine, "the national review," which was written in 1995, by this guy. and he does say that he believes that nitrogen asphyxiation, in his words is, quote, the perfect method of execution. the source of his expertise on this, though, i mean -- i mean no offense, but he describes himself online as an amateur screenwriter. his latest screenplay, according to his website, was adapted into a play called "the blood countess." it's premiering at a north hollywood theater company called
1:19 am
zombie joes, which the poster notes is right across the street from the kfc. this guy genuinely seems like a nice guy. he seems like a good article. his article 20 years ago for the "national review" about why he thought killing people with nigh ro engine might be a good way to kill people, it's a very well-written article. but he really is just an amateur screenwriter. his website today lists him as available for hire, delivering creativity on demand and on deadline. he wrote to us this week when we contacted him about his role in what oklahoma has done. he wrote to us that he is pleased by what he called "my invention." he was pleased that "my invention" is finally being taken up 20 years after he wrote that article. it does kind of seem like he is the guy who invented this. and now it is the law in one u.s. state. if oklahoma gets its lethal injection statute struck down by the supreme court in this case
1:20 am
next week, this really is what they're turning to. this nitrogen idea, which this screenwriter invented. and wrote about in a conservative magazine 20 years ago. oklahoma state lawmakers say they have had inquiries from lawmakers in 19 states who say that they might want to do it too now that oklahoma's doing it. so this kind of feels like an edge of the diving board motel, right? in this case next week, lethal injection might go away across the country, all across the country. and in the 32 death penalty states we've got in this country, mostly red states, all across the country, they are then going to have to decide what they're going to do about capital punishment. are they going to go like the conservatives in the nebraska legislature want to do, and get rid of capital punishment altogether. there are strong winds blowing that direction, including some winds from the political right, or are day going to find a backup plan? are they going to follow the lead of oklahoma, which states have done before, that's how he got lethal injection in the first place, when stated followed oklahoma after oklahoma invented lethal injection as a new way to kill people in the late '70s.
1:21 am
that national decision, nebraska or oklahoma, is about to be foisted on us as a country and on the national republican party and the leaders of national conservative thought, in the middle of a presidential campaign that is already looking like it's going to be dominated by social conservative activism, that the beltway really does not get and that often makes absolutely no factual sense. tada. if your purse is starting to look more like a tissue box... you may be muddling through allergies. try zyrtec® for powerful allergy relief. and zyrtec® is different than claritin®. because it starts working faster on the first day you take it. zyrtec®. muddle no more™ . [ screaming ] rate suckers! [ bell dinging ] your car insurance goes up because of their bad driving. people try all sorts of ways to get rid of them. [ driver panting ] if you're sick of paying more than your fair share...
1:22 am
[ screams ] get snapshot from progressive, and see just how much your good driving could save you.
1:23 am
god bless c-span. watch what happens here. this is the u.s. senate today. they're voting on the bill that the republicans say they want to vote on before they vote on loretta lynch for attorney general. they're handling an amendment to that bill here, one that was put up by senator sherrod brown of ohio. and when senators are voting on an amendment like this, there is the traditional sacred milling around time, which is what you see here on the senate floor. ugh see senator dianne feinstein there in the sort of burgundy suit. you can see senator al franken, senator kelly ayotte. but watch this part. this is senator harry reid, with the arrow there.
1:24 am
and you remember now that harry reid has to wear sunglasses, even indoors, because of the eye injury he got while he was working out on new year's day, he had to wear the sunglasses even talking to me last week. he's in the senate today, harry reid is there, he is wearing his sunglasses, has he has to do everywhere. he's wearing his sunglasses on the senate floor. and rand paul comes swaggering up to the front of the senate and pops on his shades and sticks his hand out at harry reid, and harry reid leaves him hanging there for a second, but then, boom bipartisan fist bump. look. puts on the shades and sticks his hand out and harry reid looks at him, oh, fist bump. there's this moment where you're not sure what's going to happen like, if that's going to be a fight or what. the way we know it was a bit of a tense moment because of senator elizabeth warren. that's her in the purple/blue thing here. look how she reacts. she's talking to debbie stabenow and sees rand paul coming. like, do i need to get this there? are you guys seeing this? i love the body language there.
1:25 am
i love c-span. i love c-span every single day. and senator elizabeth warren is here for the interview tonight, to talk about not the rand paul fist bump, but if she wants to, i won't stop her. that's still ahead.
1:26 am
we are rich in the news right now in the category of big things that have not yet happened, they are likely to happen, but we're not certain they will, and if they do happen, it will be a very big deal. case in point, there's loretta lynch. president obama nominated her to be attorney general last november. she has been waiting for a vote ever since. we have heard senate majority leader mitch mcconnell promise multiple times he was going to hold a vote on loretta lynch's
1:27 am
nomination, but despite those promises, he has so far never done it. and this is the longest period any attorney general candidate has ever waited at this stage in their nomination. well, once again now, we have been promised by mitch mcconnell that there is about to be a vote on loretta lynch. it's supposed to happen tomorrow at 9:30 in the morning. but as i said, we've been burned on this before, by the republican-led senate, so maybe we're about to finally get a vote on the new attorney general, but don't count your chickens. believe it when you see it. also, separate story, keep an eye on the subject of this "washington post" scoop today. "the post" reports exclusively today that there's about to be a big upsurge in the number of prisoners transferred out of guantanamo, maybe ten of them by june, maybe 50 of them by the end of the year. okay, maybe. i'll believe it when we see it, especially since no one has been transferred out of guantanamo for months now. but then there's this. dropped in casually, in the
1:28 am
second to laugh paragraph of this scoop, like it's no biggy, quote, white house officials are also exploring options for the unilateral closure of the prison at guantanamo. really? the white house is working on way for president obama to unilaterally finally close guantanamo with or without congress? really? tell me more. if that's possible, if that does happen welcome to the anything big national security story of 2015 and likely 2016 and maybe longer than that. as of today, "the washington post" is alone in reporting that. again, it is the second to last paragraph of an otherwise unrelated story, but if that bears out, then obviously that will be a very, very huge deal. as always, watch this space. wish your skin could bounce back like it used to? new neutrogena hydro boost water gel. with hyaluronic acid it plumps skin cells with intense hydration and locks it in. for supple, hydrated skin. hydro boost. from neutrogena.
1:29 am
1:30 am
my cut hurts. mine hurt more.
1:31 am
mine stopped hurting faster! neosporin plus pain relief starts relieving pain faster and kills more types of infectious bacteria. neosporin plus pain relief kills the germs. fights the pain.
1:32 am
here's what it sounds like when harry reid says it. >> the answer is, not only no, but hell no, okay? >> how do you really feel? >> even when he's mad, even when he's using mild swears and wearing his tough-guy glasses, harry reid is still a soft-spoken dude. but here's how it sounds when he says it. here's how it sounds when massachusetts senator elizabeth warren says it? >> are you ready to fight?! no more secret deals! no more special deals for multi-national corporations! are you ready to fight?! are you ready to fight anymore deals that say we're going to help the rich get richer and leave everyone else behind?!
1:33 am
are you ready to fight that?! >> senator elizabeth warren speaking last week at a union event, a rally with the steelworkers, not just opposing this thing, but trying to make sure there is a national fight against it. and that has led to headlines like this and like this and like this. because what she is fighting and what other progressive democrats are fighting is something the obama administration is negotiating as an international deal, something that congress is now deciding to do about, and something that president obama just took issue with this way, to msnbc's own chris matthews. >> i love elizabeth. we're allies on a whole host of issues, but she's wrong on this. now, understandably, folks in labor and some progressives are suspicious generally, because of the experiences they saw in the past. my point is, don't fight the last war. wait and see what we actually
1:34 am
have in this deal, before you make those judgments. i would not be doing this trade deal if i did not think it was good for the middle class. and when we hear folks make a lot of suggestions about how bad this trade deal is, when you dig into the facts, they are wrong. i am happy to debate this, and i'm sure jerry and others are, based on the actual facts. this is the most progressive framework for trade we have ever had. >> president obama and senator elizabeth warren have been allies on issues large and small since his first days in politics and even before that. but when the president singled her out yesterday, she was not shy about firing back. she sent out this tweet. the obama administration says i'm wrong, we shouldn't worry about the trade deal, so why can't the latin american people read the deal? and that link to this blog post, you can't read this, saying that congress shouldn't give the
1:35 am
administration the authority to negotiate the deal without congress's input, as long as what's in the deal is being kept from the public. it says, i'm wrong, but people like you can't see the actual deal. it's top secret. why? here's the real answer people have given me. we can't make this deal public, because if the american people saw what was in it, they would be opposed to it. so we reached out to the obama administration today, and an administration official told us that the complete text of the trade deal is available to be read by members of congress, upon request. members of congress can, if they ask, go look at the deal in a secure office. the official called that standard practice for any international deal that's still being negotiated. the fast track legislation being considered now includes a provision that would make the trade agreement available to the public, online, before congress votes on it. the administration also says there would be a public comment period, 60 days, before the president signs it. but what senator warren says is true right now, the public
1:36 am
cannot, now, see the deal. and the senate finance committee was supposed to vote on the fast track authority earlier today, until senator bernie sanders forced a delay, so that committee had to say there well into the night tonight. the bill is still ultimately expected to pass the democrat's progressive, populous wing has not managed to derail this thing. but clearly they are not done. what comes next? and how do you respond when the president tells you with a smile that he loves you, but you're wrong. senator elizabeth warren joins us next. many wrinkle creams come with high hopes, but hope... doesn't work on wrinkles. neutrogena® rapid wrinkle repair has the fastest retinol formula...
1:37 am
to work on fine lines and even deep wrinkles in just one week. neutrogena®.
1:38 am
1:39 am
when i hear critics of the possibility of us instituting the most progressive trade deal in our history, their answer, i guess, is the status quo. the status quo is not working for us. i've got to say, chris, some of the information that's been getting thrown out there plays into legitimate fears that democratic voters have and progressives have, but it's simply not true. it's simply not the facts. i love elizabeth. we're allies on a whole host of issues, but she's wrong on this.
1:40 am
>> elizabeth, as known to most people, as massachusetts senator, elizabeth warren. and that was president obama in his interview with chris matthews yesterday, taking on senator warren specifically on the issue of trade. she is wrong, he said there, in case you missed it. senator warren has been a vocal opponent, alongside bernie sanders and sherrod brown and some other senate democrats, a vocal opponent of the trade deal that the white house is negotiating right now with 11 countries in the asia pacific region, also including canada and mexico. the president says this is the most progressive trade deal in history, but the progressives in his own party, perhaps most notably, senator warren, really do oppose this deal. and they oppose it publicly and loudly. and joining us exclusively tonight for "the interview" is senator elizabeth warren to talk about it. senator warren, thank you so much for being here tonight. >> thank you, it's good to be here. >> so you have said part of the problem here is that the public can't read this deal, therefore congress shouldn't grease the wheels to it being okayed.
1:41 am
before the public can find out what's in it. have you been able to read the deal? >> yeah. so senators can go and read it. people in the house of representatives can go and read it. but we're not allowed to talk about it. so now it's the case that the president says that he wants the american people to judge this deal based on the facts, but to do that, he's got to make the deal public. otherwise, the american people can't judge it on the facts. you won't put the facts out there. the press should be able to see this. people should be able to dig into it. if it's a great deal for families, like the president says, or a great deal for workers, then put it out there and let them see it before we have to grease the skids to get the deal done. >> on the issue of who has information about what's in the deal, the administration told us today that there will be a public comment period before the trade agreement is signed by the president, that the public will be able to see it online for a
1:42 am
certain amount of time, before any decision is made. does that assuage any of your fears about this? >> look, they're asking us to vote now on greasing the skids, so that we give up now, any chance to be able to amend it, any chance to be able to block it. any chance to be able to slow it down. give all that up, and then you'll get to see the deal on the other side. i just don't think that's reasonable. and let me tell you partly and let me tell you partly why. we can talk about the facts that the american people can't see, but there's one fact that the american people can see. and that is, how the negotiation process worked. so, you know, these negotiations have been going on for a long time. and there are 28 different working groups for it. 85% of the people in those working groups are senior executives in various industries that are going to be affected, or, they are lobbyists, for those industries.
1:43 am
they're the ones who have helped shape the deals. they're the ones who have helped determine what that deal is going to look like on the other side. and my view is, when the process is rigged, then the outcome is likely to be rigged too. >> so you're saying that the corporate interest that will be directly involved in this, and who most want the deal, even as most labor interests are saying they are not interested in this deal, you're saying those corporate interests do have all the access, not only to seeing what's in it, but in fact to shaping what's in it? >> they've been in there now for months and months and months, during the negotiations, the back and forth, helping shape this deal. and i just think it's time to say, no. what we want to do here is we want to say, put the deal out there, so the american people can see it and let's have a debate on the facts. and i'll tell you this, i started a petition now, after i listened to the president, i said, let's hear from the american people, it's at elizabeth, right
1:44 am
there on the front page. for the american people to say, no, we want to see this deal before you grease the skids, not afterwards. >> in terms of your dialogue with president obama about this. obviously, it's got to turn your head a little bit when the president calls you out by name and says, he loves you, but you're wrong. you've obviously had a constructive relationship with the president in the past, you have been an ally of his, and he of yours, on a lot of issues in the past. is it a surprise to you that you find yourself at such odds with him on this and do you see any possible path where you two may end up agreeing or more, on the same page about this? are you inextricably at odds on this? >> i'm always, always here to talk to the president and to try to be constructive in any way possible but let me remind you about this greasing the skids part of it. this is a deal that lasts. the greasing lasts at least until 2018.
1:45 am
and most likely, because of the way it's constructed, until 2021. which means it's partly about the deal negotiated by this president but, look, i hope that we have great people that i love in the white house. i hope we have great people running the senate and the house. i want to see democrats in charge everywhere but. but do understand, once the skids are greased with this trade promotion authority, it lasts into the next president and potentially even the president after that. they will have the same capacity to run these deals through and to run them through with very little input from anyone other than the industries that are involved and with very little oversight from the public and virtually no ability to stop it from the senate or the house and that really has me worried. >> it looks like the fastrack authority may go ahead.
1:46 am
obviously, you have slowed it down. your complaints have changed the trajectory, of which it would have been discussed, without you being so vocal on it. if you don't win the vote and the fastrack authority is approved, are there other ways that you think that you can get your point across on this? >> you know, i think part of this is making sure that people are heard from. you know, for me, this is basic democracy 101. i want people to be able to see the first deal that's lined up, before they say, yeah, it's okay. let's put congress on a fastrack to make that sort of thing work, i want them to be able to see it, and i want them to be able to debate it. and i want to say, we're not going to agree, right a blank check for whatever some subsequent president may negotiate on down the line in a second deal, a third deal, or whatever. for me, this is just kind of fundamental principles about how democracy is supposed to work.
1:47 am
american workers have really been slammed by past trade deals. they have not been good for us here in america. it's not been good for american manufacturing. if this is a better deal, then hang it out there in public and let us take a look at it. let us have a public conversation, based on the facts. >> senator elizabeth warren, thank you so much for your time tonight. always great to see you. thank you. >> thank you. all right, coming up next, saving the planet one squirt gun at a time. stay with us.
1:48 am
1:49 am
look at this one! the muppet smile. >> ahh! i was a crocodile. wait until i get big.
1:50 am
1:51 am
on january 28th, 1969, an oil rig six miles off the coast of santa barbara, california, suffered a massive blowout and released 100,000 barrels of oil. that giant oil spilled killed thousands of birds and all sorts of marine life that lived in that channel. it was the largest ever to affect u.s. waters to that point. it was that terrible oil spill in 1969 and the sad attempts to soak up those thousands of barrels of oil with pitiful
1:52 am
means of rescue like straw that inspired one united states senator, senator gaylord nelson from wisconsin to a new idea. he looked at that effort and thought, a, maybe there's some way we could get the country to focus, just for a day, on the way that we americans are ruining the environment. his staff raised money. they wanted college students on board so they specifically picked a day they thought would be easy for younger people, maybe a wednesday in spring would be best, somewhere between spring break and finals. but that's the story of how today, april 22nd, became earth day. this was the front page of the "new york times," 45 years ago, look. millions join earth day observances all across the nation. huge, light hearted throngs ambled down autoless streets in new york after call for a regeneration of a polluted environment celebrating the exuberant spring.
1:53 am
protesters spilled oil outside the department of the interior to protest offshore oil drilling. on college campuses, protesters spilled squirt guns with real oil and shot it at each other to make a point. this photo was from tulane in new orleans. in the wake of that offshore oil spill, a treatment on how to treat the environment better. a company held a nationwide student contest to create a new angle for recycled paper. the winner of this contest was gary anderson. he won $2,000 for his winning submission, which was this. to this day, that symbol, the mobius loop of three arrows chasing each other, to this day, that symbol serves the practical purpose of signaling to you that it's okay to recycle your
1:54 am
plastic bottle or cardboard box. around the world it means reduce, reuse or recycle. tonight, msnbc is going to air a brand new documentary. it's gotten a lot of attention because it's really good and it focuses on reducing waste. and not in the way you might have expected it. the documentary is called "just eat it." you've probably heard about it in recent days. it's going to air right here on msnbc in just a few minutes. it's going to be followed by a specialcation led by msnbc's food correspondent. that's tonight in just a couple of minutes. you do not want to miss it. stay with us. if you struggle with type 2 diabetes, you're certainly not alone. fortunately, many have found a different kind of medicine that lowers blood sugar. imagine what it would be like
1:55 am
to love your numbers. discover once-daily invokana®. it's the #1 prescribed in the newest class of medicines that work with the kidneys to lower a1c. invokana® is used along with diet and exercise to significantly lower blood sugar in adults with type 2 diabetes. it's a once-daily pill that works around the clock... here's how: the kidneys allow sugar to be absorbed back into the body. invokana® reduces the amount of sugar allowed back in... and sends some sugar out... ...through the process of urination. and while it's not for weight loss it may help you lose weight. invokana® can cause important side effects including dehydration, which may cause you to feel dizzy, faint, lightheaded, or weak especially when you stand up. other side effects may include kidney problems, genital yeast infections... ...urinary tract infections, changes in urination,... ...high potassium in the blood or increases in cholesterol.
1:56 am
do not take invokana® if you have severe kidney problems or are on dialysis. stop taking and call your doctor right away if you experience symptoms such as rash swelling, or difficulty breathing or swallowing. tell your doctor about any medical conditions medications you are taking and if you have kidney or liver problems. using invokana® with a sulfonylurea or insulin may increase risk of low blood sugar. it's time. lower your blood sugar with invokana®. imagine loving your numbers. there's only one invokana®. ask your doctor about it by name.
1:57 am
best new thing in the world today, it's very simple, it's very easy, it is this. it's the handful of baby crocodiles. that is the best new thing in the world today.
1:58 am
we're just going to cut to the chase. a handful of extremely endangered cuban baby crocodiles. and if you want to know who you can thank for that incredible image, the answer, of course, is fidel castro. those baby crocodile's parents were given by fidel castro to vladimir shokalov 40 years ago. sort of a we're communist, you're communist, here is our communist bow tie. they were moved to the moscow city zoo and then the cob dials were sent to a zoo in sweden, which wanted them very badly. the cuba to russia crocodile have been living at that zoo in sweden since 1981. once they got settled in, they started breeding in 1984. in the '90s, the swedish zoo named their breeding pair castro and hillary, as in hillary clinton with two "l"s and everything. it was the '90s.
1:59 am
as castro and hillary were happily mating in sweden, the cuban crocodile were falling off a cliff back home. they used to be found across the caribbean. now they're found in only two swamps in cuba. turns out american crocs have flooded the region and decimated the cuban population. last year, cuban authorities asked the swedish zoo if they could have some of castro and hillary's babies. they asked for some of the offspring to release back into the cuban wild. this week, those cuban baby crocodiles whose parents traveled from cuba to russia to sweden, those babies arrived back in havana. they'll be kept quarantined for a month in a crocodile home somewhere. but when they are of age, they'll be released into the wild hoping adding additional cuban crocodiles to the cuban pool will help keep the species alive. in that effort to help get the baby crocodiles back to cuba is
2:00 am
how we got this amazing picture, which is obviously the best new thing in the world. look at their little faces. this louisiana storm looks like a pressure walker. there was even snow at the ball work and a railroad track that quickly becomes a stream. some of that bad weather forced an emergency landing. >> you could feel like king congress picked up the plane and shook it like there was no tomorrow. >> today david petraeus faces charges for faceleaking information. a busy thursday today on "first look." >> good morning.


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on